State v. Kruse

303 Neb. 799 (2019) · Nebraska Supreme Court · July 26, 2019 · No. No. S-18-1011

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed Steven C. Kruse’s conviction for driving under the influence with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or higher. The court held that, even assuming deficiencies in the affidavit supporting the blood-draw warrant, the Leon good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied. The court also held that the State could raise the good faith exception for the first time before the appellate court where the existing record was sufficient to resolve the issue.

Court
Nebraska Supreme Court
Writing for the Court
Stacy, J.; Heavican, C.J.; Miller-Lerman, J.; Cassel, J.; Funke, J.; Papik, J.; Freudenberg, J.
Jurisdiction
Nebraska
Decision date
July 26, 2019
Docket number
No. S-18-1011
Procedural posture
Kruse was convicted after a stipulated bench trial in county court of driving under the influence with a blood alcohol concentration of .15 or higher, first offense. The district court affirmed on appeal, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court's judgment.
Standard of review
Historical facts underlying a Fourth Amendment suppression ruling are reviewed for clear error, while the ultimate question whether those facts trigger or violate Fourth Amendment protections is reviewed independently as a question of law. Application of the good faith exception is also reviewed independently as a question of law.
Precedential value
Published Nebraska Supreme Court opinion; precedential.
Parties
Steven C. Kruse v. State of Nebraska
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

suppression of evidencefourth amendmentsearch and seizureexclusionary ruleappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedureconstitutional lawappellate procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the affidavit supporting the warrant for Kruse's blood draw was sufficient to establish probable cause.
  2. Whether the Leon good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied despite the affidavit's alleged deficiencies.
  3. Whether the district court could consider the State's good faith argument when the record did not establish that the argument had been raised before the county court but showed that it was raised before the district court.

Holdings

  1. An appellate court may consider the good faith exception for the first time on appeal when its applicability presents a legal question based on proved or admitted facts and the existing record is sufficient to resolve it. The appellate court may not raise the exception sua sponte, but the State may raise it at the appellate level.
  2. The Leon good faith exception applied because the officers acted in objectively reasonable good faith in relying on the blood-draw warrant, even assuming the affidavit was insufficient to establish probable cause.
  3. The blood evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant was admissible because the Leon good faith exception applied; exclusion was not required.

Key quotations

But we do not engage in a detailed discussion of whether the affidavit was sufficient to support a finding of probable cause, because we conclude that, even if the affidavit was deficient, the district court properly applied the Leon good faith exception. (805)
The State has the burden of showing the good faith exception applies to an otherwise unconstitutional search. (811-812)
Under the totality of the circumstances in this case, we find the officers acted in objectively reasonable good faith in reliance upon the search warrant. (816)

Factual background

Police responded to an injury accident and found Kruse slumped or unresponsive in the driver's seat of one of two severely damaged vehicles. Officers and emergency medical personnel detected an odor of alcohol, and an officer observed Kruse to be incoherent and unable to perform field sobriety testing or a preliminary breath test at the scene. A county court judge issued a warrant for a blood draw; the warrant was executed at the hospital, producing a blood alcohol result of .168.

Procedural history

Kruse moved to suppress blood-test evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant, arguing that the supporting affidavit failed to establish probable cause. The county court denied suppression and entered a conviction; it sentenced Kruse to 9 months' probation and revoked his operator's license for 1 year. The district court affirmed, alternatively applying the Leon good faith exception. The Nebraska Supreme Court moved the appeal to its docket and affirmed, concluding that the good faith exception applied without deciding whether the affidavit established probable cause.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…