Georgia DUI Cases of Note

  

Court of Appeals rejects hard fought Cherokee DUI and finds fields relevant to establish blood alcohol

Wednesday, April 06, 2011

Holowiak v. State II, A10A2021, Georgia Court of Appeals, March 29, 2011. DUI per se; DUI less safe. Cherokee County State Court DUI Jury Trial.



The Defendant Driver, Holowiak, was stopped at a roadblock in Cherokee County by the Sheriff's Department. The Officer smelled an odor of alcohol, observed red and glassy eyes, flused face, admitted a couple of drinks, consented to a preliminary breath test, performed the HGN, walk-and-turn and one-legged-stand which indicated under the influence. Holowiak then blew .125 on the Intoxilyzer 5000 in a mobile command unit at the roadblock.  Holowiak was tried on less safe and per se DUI. The jury reached a not guilty verdict on the less DUI and could not reach a verdict on per se. The case was retried on pre se only and Holowiak was found guilty of DUI per se. Holowiak argued that evidence of his less safe driving, alcohol impairment and field sobriety tests was irrelevant in a DUI per se case. The Court of Appeals found that Georgia law favors the admission of relevant evidence no matter how slight the probative value. Relevance is the domain of the trial court. The Court reasoned that Field Sobriety tests are not designed to detect the mere presence of alcohol in a Defendant's system but also information about the quantity of alcohol correlating with a breath test.  There is still a Harper objection that fields other than HGN cannot correlate to a numerical blood alcohol level but it was not addressed in this appeal.  The Court of Appeals reasoned that evidence of the correlation of field tests to a given Intox 5000 reading was relevant to counter Defendant's attacks on the Intox. 5000. Next, Holowiak argued that the Court erred by denying discovery of exculpatory evidence including source code through an out of state witness violated his right to confront witnesses. The Court held that his right to confront witnesses was not violated if he could not show the evidence was necessary and material and not speculative. Holowiak argued that the trial court erred by refusing to exclude evidence that he declined an independent test of blood, breath or urine.  The Court found without explanation that it was relevant and did not violate his right to self-incrimination. Finally, the Court of Appeals overruled Holowiak's objection that charges did not adequately address possible flaws with the Intox. 5000, did not charge that mere presence of alcohol does not support impairment, and on considering pre-existing conditions in evaluating fields.
The Court of Appeals ruled that the charges as a whole addressed these issues.  


Tags

 

Archive




No legal advice should be obtained from the web site alone. George C. Creal, Jr., P.C. is Georgia Professional Corporation authorized to practice law in the State of Georgia only and all information contained in this web site is intended for use for DUI/DWIs occurring in the State of Georgia. Individuals with DUI/DWIs from outside the State of Georgia should contact a licensed attorney in the state of occurrence of their DUI. Copyright © 2015 George C. Creal, Jr. P.C.
Protected by Copyscape Online Plagiarism Checker
George C. Creal Jr.
on Google+






Atlanta Office: 480 John Wesley Dobbs Ave., NE, Unit 190, Atlanta, GA 30312 Phone: (404) 333-0706