Motion to suppress blood alcohol concentration (BAC) analysis results; Probable cause to arrest; People v Murawski; People v Maggit; People v Czuprynski; Operating while intoxicated (OWI)

The court held that the totality of the known facts and circumstances justified “the officer’s belief that defendant was operating his vehicle while intoxicated” and thus, probable cause supported his arrest. As a result, the district court erred in “suppressing the BAC analysis results” and the circuit court properly reversed. The “arresting officer testified that he was trained in field sobriety testing and that he had conducted hundreds of OWI investigations. He testified further that defendant was slow to stop his vehicle after the officer activated his overhead lights. As soon as the stop began, [he] observed that defendant’s eyes were ‘glassy’ and that there was an alcoholic odor coming from [his] car and person. This evidence supported a determination of probable cause to arrest defendant for OWI, even if the odor was only ‘slight.’” The court noted that he “also told the officer that he had consumed two 16-ounce beers about an hour and a half before the traffic stop. After considering these indicators of intoxication in defendant, the officer requested defendant to perform field sobriety tests, including a horizontal gaze nystagmus (HGN) test, a walk-and-turn test, and a one-legged stand test.” As to the HGN test, the officer “admitted that he did not perform all aspects of” it correctly. But the court noted that “even an improperly administered test can be relevant to a probable cause determination under the totality of the circumstances.” The court found that it did “not appear that the officer’s HGN test was so unreliable to prevent him from placing any stock in it.” In addition, “contrary to the district court’s findings that defendant did not appear ‘unsteady’ and did not wobble his head during HGN testing, the officer’s body camera footage, although at times difficult to see and hear, shows that defendant did exhibit signs of intoxication during the field sobriety testing.” The court further found that the record indicated “the circuit court understood and applied the totality-of-the-circumstances test and correctly concluded that the facts known to the officer objectively supported [his] determination that there was probable cause to believe defendant was” OWI. Affirmed.