Today's opinions: Breathalyzer tests and hot pursuit
City of Seattle v. Holifield, No. 83277-3. The City charged Matthew Jacob with DUI after he failed a Breathalyzer test. The Breathalyzer used had been calibrated using a control alcohol solution certified by Ann Marie Gordon, the former manager of the Washington State Toxicology Laboratory. Gordon resigned after it was publicized that she falsely certified alcohol solutions.
Jacob and the City of Seattle agreed to apply a ruling from a similar case (Seattle v. Kennedy) to this one. The Kennedy court found the Gordon misconduct resulted in actual prejudice to the defendant. But rather than dismissing the Kennedy case, the Breathalyzer evidence was merely suppressed.
The Breathalyzer evidence in Jacob’s case was also suppressed, but the City argued that only dismissal was available under applicable court rules (CrRLJ 8.3(b)).
The Supreme Court unanimously disagreed and held that suppression is an available remedy. Justice Richard Sanders wrote the opinion of the court.
State v. Eriksen, No. 80653-5. The Supreme Court said today that tribal police officers can pursue motorists beyond the limits of tribal lands on suspicion of driving under the influence until authorities with jurisdiction to arrest arrived.
A Lummi Nation Police Department officer witnessed a motorist on the reservation driving at night with high beams and drifting across the center divider. He began following the vehicle and activated his emergency lights. After traveling a quarter mile the car pulled into a gas station located off the reservation. The police officer witnessed the driver, Loretta Eriksen, hop over the car’s center console and into the passenger’s seat. The officer detained Eriksen until a Whatcom County police deputy arrived, who arrested her for DUI.
Ms. Eriksen was convicted for DUI. The trial court said Lummi Nation’s inherent sovereign power authorizes tribal police to continue in “fresh pursuit” of offenders who drive off the reservation. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case to resolve this issue of first impression.
The Supreme Court, with Justice Richard Sanders writing the majority, said that the Lummi Nation is a sovereign nation with inherent authority to enforce its laws and detain Indians or non-Indians who violate those laws. Courts have long recognized the right of law enforcement officers to cross jurisdictional lines when in fresh pursuit of a violator. The court said this doctrine should apply to sovereign tribal nations as well.
Justice Mary Fairhust dissented, writing that the fresh pursuit doctrine is inapplicable. “I join that part of the majority's analysis that finds, pursuant to inherent tribal sovereignty, that Lummi Nation Tribal Police Officer Mike McSwain had authority to stop Loretta Eriksen outside the reservation to determine whether she was a tribal member over whom McSwain had jurisdiction. However, because I cannot find any applicable authority under which McSwain had the power to detain Eriksen once he determined she was not a tribal member, I am ultimately forced to dissent.”
