Summary
The Nevada Supreme Court held that a preliminary breath test administered without a warrant or consent violated the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights and was properly suppressed. However, the court held that the telephonic warrant for an evidentiary blood draw remained supported by probable cause based on observations independent of the breath-test results, so the blood-draw evidence was admissible.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court properly suppressed the preliminary breath test as an unconstitutional warrantless search.
- Whether the district court properly invalidated the telephonic search warrant and suppressed the evidentiary blood draw after excluding the preliminary breath test result.
- Whether probable cause supported the blood-draw warrant after the improperly obtained preliminary breath test information was disregarded.
Holdings
- The preliminary breath test was properly suppressed because it was administered without a warrant, consent, or other applicable exception to the warrant requirement.
- The district court erred in invalidating the telephonic search warrant and suppressing the evidentiary blood draw because probable cause remained after the preliminary breath test information was disregarded.
Key quotations
“A defendant is not entitled to suppression of the fruits of a search warrant, even based on intentional falsehoods or omissions, unless probable cause is lacking once the false information is purged and any omitted information is considered.” (817)
“Without considering the PBT, the search warrant was still supported by probable cause, and the evidentiary blood draw was a valid search and seizure pursuant to that warrant.” (818)
Factual background
A deputy observed Sample driving erratically, crossing fog lines and double yellow lines, accelerating rapidly, and failing to stop. At Sample's residence, the deputy observed red and watery eyes, an odor of alcohol, slow and slurred speech, unsteady movements, refusal to comply with commands, and an admission that he had consumed a couple of beers. After Sample was handcuffed and placed in a patrol car, the deputy administered a preliminary breath test without consent, then obtained a telephonic warrant for blood draws based on the PBT result and the deputy's other observations.
Procedural history
Sample was charged with felony driving under the influence after a prior felony DUI conviction. The district court suppressed the preliminary breath test, finding that it was a warrantless search conducted without consent, and also invalidated the telephonic search warrant and suppressed the resulting blood-draw evidence as fruit of the poisonous tree. The State appealed; the Nevada Supreme Court affirmed suppression of the preliminary breath test but reversed suppression of the warrant and blood evidence and remanded.
Remand instructions
The court affirmed suppression of the preliminary breath test but remanded for the district court to deny suppression of the telephonic search warrant and evidentiary blood-draw evidence.