State v. Taylor

There are five factors, Jarnagin factors, that the courts apply in deciding "whether the breath test results [are] admissible because defendant's decision to take the breath test broke the causal chain between the prior Article I, section 12 violation and his breath test results." State v. Jarnagin, 251 Or 703, 277 P3d 535 (2012).

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s decision to partially deny her motion to suppress evidence. On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial court erred when it failed to suppress the breath test results because the "police violated Article I, section 12 of the Oregon Constitution by questioning Defendant without confirming that Defendant understood her Miranda rights," and as such the results of that test were obtained in violation of the Oregon Constitution. In response, the State argued that the breath test evidence was not obtained unconstitutionally because Defendant had no right to refuse the test under "Oregon's implied consent law." There are five factors, Jarnagin factors, that the courts apply in deciding "whether the breath test results [are] admissible because defendant's decision to take the breath test broke the causal chain between the prior Article I, section 12 violation and his breath test results." State v. Jarnagin, 251 Or 703, 277 P3d 535 (2012). The Court held that the interrogation of the Defendant by the officer was unlawful because Defendant made it clear to the officer that she did not understand her Miranda rights, and as such the officer's conduct was a violation of Article I, section 12 of the Oregon Constitution. Additionally, the Court concluded that the State failed to disprove that the breath test results from the repeated custodial interrogation of Defendant were not "derivative of any Miranda violation."

Reversed and remanded.