Alexander Dejarnette v. State of Maryland

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that alleged compliance or noncompliance with the twenty-minute observation period in COMAR 10.35.02.08G affects the weight of breath-test results, not their admissibility. The Court concluded that the relevant statutes and regulation do not require exclusion of breath-test evidence for noncompliance with the observation period. It further held that the record supported, and the circuit court found, compliance with the observation-period requirement in this case.

Holdings

1. Alleged noncompliance with the twenty-minute observation period in COMAR 10.35.02.08G affects the weight to be given to breath-test results, not their admissibility. Maryland's statutory exclusionary rule applies to violations of the applicable statutory provisions, not to alleged violations of the regulation, which contains no exclusionary provision for failure to comply with the observation period.
2. The regulation does not require an officer to maintain constant, fixed, uninterrupted visual attention for the entire twenty-minute period. Officers may use their visual, auditory, and olfactory senses and remain sufficiently close to determine whether the individual eats, drinks, smokes, or places a foreign substance in the mouth.
3. The record supported a finding that the officers complied with the twenty-minute observation period, and the circuit court made findings on the record that they did so.

Questions Presented

1. Whether alleged noncompliance with the twenty-minute observation period in COMAR 10.35.02.08G renders breath-test results inadmissible or instead affects only the weight of the evidence.
2. Whether the record supported a finding that the officers complied with the twenty-minute observation period.
3. Whether the circuit court made findings on the record concerning compliance with the observation period.

Disposition

affirmed