State of Maine v. John T. Simons

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed John T. Simons’s conviction for operating under the influence. The court held that the officer had reasonable articulable suspicion to request field sobriety testing, that testimony concerning the horizontal gaze nystagmus test was properly admitted, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The court also found no obvious error in the trial court’s determination that the impaneled jurors were impartial, while disapproving the use of a voir dire question suggesting that defendants should present evidence of innocence.

Holdings

1. The trial court correctly found that the officer had reasonable articulable suspicion that Simons was impaired, justifying the request that he exit the vehicle and perform field sobriety tests.
2. The trial court properly admitted testimony about Simons's HGN-test performance because the State established that Caldwell was trained in administering the test and that the test was properly administered.
3. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Simons operated a vehicle while impaired by alcohol.
4. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in conducting voir dire and did not commit obvious error in finding impartial the seated jurors who had initially agreed with an erroneous questionnaire statement about proving innocence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the officer had reasonable articulable suspicion to ask Simons to exit the vehicle and perform field sobriety tests.
2. Whether the State laid a proper foundation for testimony concerning Simons's horizontal gaze nystagmus test performance.
3. Whether sufficient evidence supported Simons's conviction for operating under the influence.
4. Whether the trial court improperly determined that prospective jurors who initially agreed that an accused should present evidence of innocence were impartial.

Disposition

affirmed