McLendon v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KM-01480-SCT Linked Case(s): 2005-KM-01480-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-12-2006 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: DUI First Offense - Roadblock - Intoxilyzer test - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., Diaz, Easley, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Cobb, P.J. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - MISDEMEANOR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-18-2005 Appealed from: Wayne County Circuit Court Judge: Robert Bailey Disposition: Wayne County Circuit Court convicted the Appellant after a trial de novo conducted pursuant to the defendant’s appeal to circuit court from the justice court for DUI. District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: CV-2005-121-B |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Milton L. McLendon |
V. W. CARMODY, JR., DANIEL P. SELF, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | DUI First Offense - Roadblock - Intoxilyzer test - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Milton McLendon was convicted of driving under the influence by the Wayne County Justice Court. McLendon appealed to the Wayne County Circuit Court and received a trial de novo. The court found McLendon guilty of DUI, First Offense and assessed a fine of $500 and court costs in the amount of $190.50. McLendon appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Roadblock McLendon argues that the underlying purpose of the roadblock violated his Fourth Amendment rights, because its purpose was to look for any violation of state law or any city ordinance and was made for the sole purpose of gaining federal grant money. However, the purpose of the subject roadblock was not based on the general interest of crime control, but rather the roadblock was set up for the primary purpose of checking driver’s licenses and insurance cards. Thus, public concerns were served by the roadblock and the ultimate seizure of McLendon. McLendon’s argument that the roadblock should be considered random because several factors pertaining to the roadblock were solely within the officers’ discretion lacks merit. Although no written policies regarding the procedure for setting up a roadblock were in place, the officers were permitted to choose the destination, time, and length of the roadblock; and no logbooks were kept detailing how many cars were stopped or given tickets. McLendon was stopped because the officers were consistently and indiscriminately stopping every vehicle coming through the roadblock. The intrusion did not severely interfere with McLendon’s individual liberty. Thus McLendon’s seizure was not violative of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Miss. Const. art. 3, § 23. Issue 2: Intoxilyzer test McLendon argues that the State failed to provide sufficient evidence to properly lay the foundation for the results of the intoxilyzer test to be admitted into evidence. However, McLendon made no objection to the operational checklist of the completed test being admitted into evidence. Therefore, the issue is waived. McLendon argues that the trooper should not have been allowed to testify with regards to the intoxilyzer results since he recorded the result as a test refusal in the logbook. Even if McLendon were correct, such error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt since the State had already entered into evidence the printout from the completed test. McLendon argues that the trooper did not administer the intoxilyzer test in a scientifically acceptable manner. McLendon did not raise this issue in the court below. In addition, logbook entries have nothing to do with the reliability of the test itself. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence There was legally sufficient evidence for the trial court to find McLendon guilty of DUI, First Offense. The State introduced into evidence the testimony of two officers who identified McLendon as driving a motor vehicle. The testimony of the trooper as well as the printout from the completed intoxilyzer test and the uniform traffic ticket established that McLendon had a breathalcohol content of 0.13%. Additionally, an officer testified that the field sobriety test was given on the basis of the smell of the intoxicating beverage on McLendon’s breath. In viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the DUI charge. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
