Court Opinion

ID: 9529688
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:53:22.475031+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:53.562073
License: Public Domain

BENCH, Judge
(concurring):
This case is controlled by State v. Strausberg, 895 P.2d 831 (Utah App.1995). In view of all the other evidence presented, including evidence that Garcia failed other field sobriety tests, we need not address whether the officer’s testimony as to the HGN test was admissible. Id. at 834 & n. 3. Error, if any, in admitting the HGN testimony was harmless. Id.
However, in view of the representation by both parties that trial courts need further direction on the issue, I am willing to go beyond what Strausberg requires and opine that the HGN testimony was properly admitted in this case. As indicated in the main opinion, the HGN testimony was not admitted as scientific evidence. The foundational requirements discussed in State v. Rimmasch, 775 P.2d 388 (Utah 1989) are therefore not applicable. See State ex rel. G.D. v. L.D., 894 P.2d 1278, 1284, (Utah App.1995) (technique eliciting information was not based on analysis of scientific process or statistical profile).