State v. Clapp

Summary

The Idaho Court of Appeals affirmed Tyler Shawn Clapp’s convictions for felony driving under the influence and being a persistent violator. The court held that the district court properly precluded Clapp from eliciting testimony about rising blood alcohol concentration through cross-examination of an unqualified witness. The court also held that the State’s numerical blood alcohol result was admissible under the per se theory and distinguished precedent requiring extrapolation when prosecution proceeds solely under an impairment theory.

Holdings

1. The district court did not err in foreclosing cross-examination of the State's witness about rising BAC levels because the witness had not been qualified or disclosed as an expert on that subject, the proposed testimony was speculative and potentially confusing, and Clapp had not provided advance notice sufficient to allow the State to prepare rebuttal evidence.
2. Because the State charged Clapp under both the per se and impairment theories, the BAC test result was relevant to the per se theory without extrapolation, and the extrapolation requirement stated in State v. Robinett did not apply.
3. The cumulative-error doctrine did not warrant relief because Clapp failed to establish more than one trial error.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion or violated Clapp's right to present a defense by preventing him from cross-examining a State witness about rising BAC or BAC extrapolation when no party had disclosed the witness as an expert on that subject.
2. Whether the district court erred by allowing Clapp's numerical BAC result to be considered under the impairment theory of DUI without evidence extrapolating the result back to the time of driving.
3. Whether cumulative error required reversal.

Disposition

affirmed