Case Title: State v. Benoir

Citation: 174 Vt. 632, 819 A.2d 699

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2002-12-19T00:00:00Z

Document:
State v. Benoir (2002-098); 174 Vt. 632; 819 A.2d 699

[Filed 19-Dec-2002]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2002-098

                             NOVEMBER TERM, 2002

  State of Vermont                      }        APPEALED FROM:
                                        }
                                        }
       v.                               }        District Court of Vermont,
                                        }        Unit No. 1, Windsor Circuit
  Dennis C. Benoir                      }
                                        }        DOCKET NO. 504-4-01 Wrcr

                                                 Trial Judge: Paul F. Hudson

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:


       ¶ 1.  Defendant Dennis Benoir appeals the denial of his motion to
  dismiss the DUI second charge against him and to suppress an evidentiary
  breath test.  Defendant contends that the evidentiary breath test should
  have been suppressed because he failed to receive an independent blood test
  due to an inability to pay, and thus his right to an independent blood test
  at the State's expense, conferred upon him by 23 V.S.A. § 1203a(a), (d),
  the Public Defender Act, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
  Amendment, and Chapter 1, Article 10 of the Vermont Constitution, was
  violated.  We affirm.

       ¶ 2.  The facts are not in dispute.  On April 6, 2001, a state
  trooper stopped defendant's vehicle on Route 107, based on a report from a
  concerned citizen of a vehicle being driven in an erratic manner.  The
  trooper processed defendant for DUI at the state police barracks in Bethel,
  during which time defendant provided an evidentiary sample of his breath. 
  The trooper then advised defendant of his right to obtain a sample of his
  blood for independent testing and provided him with a test kit for that
  purpose.  Defendant was also given a list of medical facilities that would
  provide independent blood-drawing services.  He was then released on
  citation to appear in court.

       ¶ 3.  Defendant then went to Gifford Memorial Hospital in Randolph
  and requested that an independent blood sample be drawn using the kit the
  trooper had supplied.  He was advised by the attending nurse that he would
  need to pay $50 in cash or by credit card in order to have his blood drawn
  by the hospital.  Defendant was unable to provide the $50 or a credit card,
  and the hospital refused to draw his blood.  Defendant eventually left the
  hospital without having his blood drawn.  He did not attempt to have his
  blood drawn at any other medical facility.

 
        
       ¶ 4.  Defendant was subsequently charged with DUI third, the State
  later amending the charge to DUI second.  After defendant's motion to
  dismiss and to suppress the evidentiary breath test was denied, he pled
  guilty to DUI second, the plea conditioned upon the results of his appeal
  of the denial of his motion.  Defendant was sentenced to twelve to
  twenty-four months, all suspended except for fifteen days on work crew, and
  he subsequently brought this appeal.

       ¶ 5.  On appeal, defendant argues that his right to an independent
  blood test at state expense, provided him by 23 V.S.A. § 1203a(a), (d), the
  Public Defender Act, the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,
  and Chapter 1, Article 10 of the Vermont Constitution, was violated,
  requiring exclusion of the evidentiary blood test.

       ¶ 6.  First, we find that Vermont's statutory scheme does not
  provide a DUI suspect with the right to an independent blood test at the
  State's expense.  Vermont's DUI statute, 23 V.S.A. §§ 1200-1220a, gives a
  person suspected of DUI the right to obtain an independent blood sample to
  challenge the State's evidentiary test.  See 23 V.S.A. § 1203a(a).  The
  statute is clear and specific, however, as to who bears the ultimate
  financial responsibility for such a test: the test is obtained "at the
  person's own expense," id., and the person seeking the test "is responsible
  for the costs of transportation, drawing the sample and subsequent
  analysis."  Id. § 1203a(e); see also State v. Wright, 169 Vt. 573, 573, 740 A.2d 347,