NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES FOR REHEARING
AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
KYLE SCOTT RYAN
Appellant,
v. Appeal No. CRC 06-70 APANO
UCN522006AP000070XXXXCR
STATE OF
Appellee.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed __________________.
Appeal from a judgment and sentence
entered by the Pinellas County Court
County Judge John Carballo
Walter L. Grantham, Jr., Esquire
Attorney for appellant
John S. Thacker, Esquire
Assistant State Attorney
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on
the defendant, Kyle Ryan’s, appeal from a judgment and sentence entered by the
Facts
Approximately 1:30 in the morning, the police responded to the scene of a one-vehicle accident. The defendant, who admitted driving the vehicle, seemed confused, disoriented, and had the smell of alcohol on him. He also had bloodshot eyes, a flushed face and slurred speech. The defendant, who claimed not to be injured, was voluntarily taken to a hospital as a precautionary measure. When a police officer arrived at the hospital, he found the defendant lying on his back on a stretcher, wearing a neck brace, and waiting for a bed in the emergency room. Although the defendant was placed in this position solely as a precautionary measure pursuant to emergency protocols, the officer testified that the defendant was not permitted to get up from that position because he had not yet been treated for possible injuries. The officer observed that the defendant had the signs of impairment, but there was no breathalyzer at the hospital and the officer determined that it was impractical or impossible to conduct a breath test. Instead the officer read the defendant implied consent; and the defendant submitted to the blood test. The defendant entered a no contest plea to DUI charges, reserving the right to appeal the denial of his motion to suppress. The defendant claims that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress the results of his blood test.
Blood draw pursuant to implied consent statute was proper
The trial court properly found that the requirements of a blood draw pursuant to §316.1932(1)(c) of the Florida Statutes (the implied consent statute) were met. Those requirements are: (1) the officer must have probable cause to believe the defendant is DUI; (2) the defendant must appear for treatment at a medical facility; and (3) there must be evidence that the administration of a breath test is impractical or impossible. Clearly, there is sufficient evidence to meet the first two requirements, only the third requirement justifies a discussion.
In Dault v. State, No. CRC
06-42 APANO, (
Once the requirements of a blood
draw pursuant to the implied consent statute have been met, voluntary consent
is not relevant. See Vaughn v. State,
No. CRC 06-16 APANO (
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this Court affirms the judgment and sentence.
DONE AND ORDERED in
__________________________ ___________________________
Michael F. Andrews Raymond O. Gross
Circuit Court Judge Circuit Court Judge
___________________________
R. Timothy Peters
Circuit Court Judge
cc: Officer of the State Attorney
Walter L. Grantham, Jr., Esquire
Honorable John Carballo