Search Tips

City of Minot v. Miller

Docket No. 20200121
Oral Argument: Monday, September 21, 2020 10:45 AM

Docket Info

Title
City of Minot, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Jonathan Andrew Miller, Defendant and Appellant
Case Type
CRIMINAL APPEAL : DUI/DUS
Appeal From
Case No. 2019-CR-01904
North Central Judicial District, Ward County
Stacy Joan Louser
Oral Argument 9/21/2020

Parties' Statement of Issues

  • Appellant

    The chemical test should be excluded in that “the officer” who administered the chemical test failed to inform Miller of the North Dakota Implied Consent Advisory, as required under N.D.C.C. § 39-20-01(3)(a).

  • Appellee 1

    N.D.C.C. §39-20-01 and §39-20-14, when read together, do not require “the” officer actually performing the Intoxilyzer to be “the” officer to read the North Dakota Implied Consent Advisory.


Summary

Jonathan Miller appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a conditional guilty plea.

Miller was arrested by Officer Broome on the charge of driving under the influence on September 22, 2019. Broome read Miller a post-arrest implied consent advisory for a chemical breath test. Broome transferred Miller to the Minot police department, where Officer Olson administered the Intoxilyzer test because Broome was not certified to do so. Officer Broome read Miller the implied consent adviosry. Officer Olson did not read an implied consent advisory to Miller. Miller was charged with driving under the influence. Prior to trial Miller filed a motion in limine to exclude chemical test results which the district court denied. Miller entered a conditional guilty plea to the charge of driving under the influence and reserved his right to appeal. This is an appeal of the criminal judgment entered as a result of Miller’s conditional guilty plea.

Miller argues the district court abused its discretion by denying a motion in limine to exclude Miller’s chemical breath test results in a criminal proceeding. Miller asserts his breath test results should have been excluded in that “the officer” who administered the chemical test was not “the officer” who informed Miller of the implied consent advisory. Miller requests this court reverse the order denying motion in limine.


Briefs

Filing Date Description
06/10/2020 APPELLANT BRIEF View
07/09/2020 APPELLEE BRIEF View

Counsel

Party Type Name
APPELLANT PRIVATE PRACTICE Chad Rory McCabe - 05474
APPELLEE CITY ATTORNEY Morgan Renae Glines - 08853

(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)

Seq. # Filing Date Description Attachment
1 04/10/2020 NOTICE OF APPEAL : 04/10/2020
2 04/13/2020 NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.
3 04/13/2020 Notice Served on Chad R. McCabe and Morgan R. Glines
4 05/08/2020 ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MAY 7, 2020 (ENTRY NOS. 1-9, 11-51)(#10 DELETED)
5 05/20/2020 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
6 05/21/2020 ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 06/10/2020
7 06/10/2020 APPELLANT BRIEF View
8 06/10/2020 APPELLANT APPENDIX
9 06/10/2020 Oral Argument Request by Appellant
10 06/16/2020 Rec'd 5 copies of ATB & 4 copies of ATA from CSD
11 07/09/2020 APPELLEE BRIEF View
12 07/14/2020 Rec'd 5 copies of AEB back from CSD
13 08/13/2020 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT
14 09/21/2020 APPEARANCES: Chad R. McCabe; Morgan R. Glines
15 09/21/2020 ARGUED: Chad R. McCabe; Morgan R. Glines
16 09/21/2020 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST