People v. Mersman, 148 P.3d 199(Colo. App. 2006)
In People v. Mersman, the defendant borrowed a friend’s car to visit his ex-girlfriend. Mersman and his ex-girlfriend sat in the car and discussed their relationship. The discussion became emotional and the couple began shouting at each other. Alarmed, neighbors called the police. When the police arrived, they found the defendant in driver’s seat of the car and noticed several physical symptoms of intoxication including: odor of alcohol on the defendant’s breath, thick or slurred speech, and bloodshot and watery eyes. Based on these factors the police placed the defendant under arrest and requested that he complete a chemical test. However, Mersman refused to take a test. As a result, the defendant’s license was revoked for one year and he was charged with DUI.
Mersman was ultimately convicted of driving under the influence. However, Mersman filed an appeal and argued that the evidence was insufficient to prove the elements of DUI beyond a reasonable doubt.
On appeal, the Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the offense of DUI beyond a reasonable doubt. In reaching its decision, the court distinguished the rulings of the Colorado Supreme Court in People v. Reynolds and People v. Roybal. Specifically, the court held that in those cases there was no evidence that the defendant exhibited physical signs of intoxication. However, in this case, several physical symptoms of intoxication were present including bloodshot eyes, slurred speech, and odor of alcohol on the breath. In addition, the defendant refused to perform roadsides and the chemical test, which the court found to be evidence of guilt. Based on this evidence, the court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
Although the Mersman decision dealt with establishing proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the case applies to arguments to suppress evidence because the police lacked probable cause. In fact, the case is frequently cited by courts and hearing officers at the DMV in support of the police officer’s decision to arrest. As a result, in many cases, simply exhibiting a few physical symptoms of intoxication may be sufficient to support an arrest.
