 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Blank4/30/2004
A state trooper conducted a warrantless search of a driver's breath following a fatal accident. Was this potentially a valid exigent circumstances search even though the driver was not arrested substantially contemporaneously with the search? We first hold that an arrest is not a prerequisite to a valid exigent circumstances warrantless breath test. Next, we construe AS 28.35.031(g) as satisfying minimal constitutional requirements for warrantless searches when exigent circumstances exist. We also hold that the trooper had probable cause to arrest the driver for negligent homicide or manslaughter and probable cause to believe that a breath test would produce relevant evidence of those crimes. But because neither the superior court nor the court of appeals reached the issue whether exigent circumstances justified this search, we remand so the superior court can make this determination.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
A vehicle driven by Laura Blank fatally struck Pennye McDowell as she walked with a companion on a residential street near Palmer on September 26, 1994. [FN1] Blank and her two daughters were driving home from her friend's house. Blank did not stop. [FN2]
FN1. Blank v. State, 3 P.3d 359, 362 (Alaska App.2000). We take many of the facts from the opinion of the court of appeals.
FN2. Id.
Blank's husband, Greg Blank, arrived at the accident scene while Alaska state troopers were investigating. [FN3] Greg Blank told Trooper Bill Tyler that his wife might have been involved in the accident. [FN4] Trooper Tyler and two other officers followed Greg back to the Blank residence. [FN5] There, Trooper Tyler interviewed Laura Blank in his patrol car. [FN6] Trooper Tyler did not place Blank under arrest. [FN7]
FN3. Id.
FN4. Id.
FN5. Id.
FN6. Id.
FN7. Id.
Blank told Trooper Tyler during the interview that she had consumed two beers at her friend's house before driving home. [FN8] Without attempting to obtain a search warrant, Trooper Tyler asked Blank to take a preliminary *159 breath test. [FN9] Blank submitted to the test. The test registered a blood-alcohol content of .082%. [FN10] Blank also agreed to accompany Trooper Tyler to a hospital for a blood test, but she refused consent at the hospital. [FN11] No blood sample was drawn.
FN8. Id.
FN9. Blank never verbally acknowledged this request, and it is not clear that she actually heard it, but she submitted to the test without hesitation or complaint. The superior court held that Blank's acquiescence to Trooper Tyler's request did not satisfy the consent exception to the warrant requirement because she did not make "a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent choice to submit to the test." The court of appeals did not address this issue, and the state did not seek review of the superior court's ruling before this court. Therefore, we assume that the consent exception is inapplicable in this case.
FN10. Blank, 3 P.3d at 362.
FN11. Id.
The grand jury indicted Blank in December 1994 for manslaughter [FN12] and leaving the scene of an accident. [FN13] The superior court denied Blank's motion to suppress evidence of the preliminary breath test. The superior court held that the test was authorized by AS 28.35.031(g), which provides that "a law enforcement officer who has reasonable grounds to believe that [a] person was operating or driving a motor vehicle in this state that was involved in an accident causing death or serious physical injury to another person" may administer blood or breath alcohol tests of the person based on the individual's implied consent. Following a mistrial, a jury convicted Blank on both counts of the indictment. [FN14]
FN12. AS 11.41.120(a).
FN13. AS 28.35.060(a).
FN
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|