By Sharyn L. Decker
Lewis County Sirens news reporter
The state Supreme Court has tossed out a man’s DUI conviction and part of his vehicular assault conviction saying prosecutors didn’t prove he was advised of his right to seek an independent blood alcohol test.
A trooper asked an interpreter to read the special warning and his rights in Spanish to Jose Matilde Morales at the hospital, but the state didn’t call the interpreter at trial to attest to that, nor was the signed form introduced into evidence, according to Thursday’s decision.
Morales, 51, was arrested in November 2004 after he “rolled the stop sign” and collided with another car at Big Hanaford Road and state Route 507 outside Centralia. A Bucoda woman and her elderly mother were injured.
He was convicted in Lewis County Superior Court of hit and run, driving under the influence and vehicular assault.
The vehicular assault charge included all three alternatives; DUI, driving recklessly and driving with disregard for the safety of others.
Morales’ lawyer had objected to the admission of the blood test because the only evidence regarding the special warning was the trooper’s testimony he had handed the form to the interpreter and listened while the interpreter spoke to Morales in a language the trooper did not understand, Supreme Court Justice Charles K. Wiggins wrote in the majority opinion. The blood test was admitted.
Judge Pro Tem R.W. Buzzard presided at the trial.
Morales appealed the DUI as well as the parts of the vehicular assault based on driving under the influence and driving recklessly.
The appeals court sided with prosecutors, and then the state Supreme Court agreed to review the case.
The knowledge of the right of independent testing of blood is especially important to a person’s defense because evidence that can prove or disprove the charge will disappear within a relatively short time, Justice Wiggins wrote.
The blood tests were erroneously admitted, the court decided.
The Supreme Court reversed the DUI conviction and the parts of his vehicular assault conviction based on DUI and reckless driving.
The justices ruled eight to one in favor of Morales. Justice James M. Johnson wrote a dissent.
For Morales, the decision means only those convictions will be removed from his criminal record; he’s already served all his time, Lewis County Deputy Prosecutor Sara Beigh said on Friday.
Elected Lewis County Prosecutor Jonathan Meyer said he and his staff talked about the case on Friday.
“Hindsight being 20-20, that witness should have been called,” Meyer said.
Meyer, who took office a year ago, pointed out the original deputy prosecutor who handled the case during its appeal also failed to brief the Supreme Court on the matter.
The trial and the appeal were handled by two deputy prosecutors Meyer didn’t invite to stay with the office after he was elected, he said.
•••
Read the Supreme Court decision, here
Read the dissenting opinion, here
Tags: By Sharyn L. Decker, news reporter