People v. Jenne

• Decision Date: 07 July 1988
• Docket Number: Docket No. 97998
• Citation: People v. Jenne, 168 Mich.App. 518, 425 N.W.2d 116 (Mich. App. 1988)
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Allan JENNE, Sr., Defendant-Appellant. 168 Mich.App. 518, 425 N.W.2d 116
• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan

Page 116

425 N.W.2d 116

PEOPLE of the State of Michigan, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Allan JENNE, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 97998.

168 Mich.App. 518, 425 N.W.2d 116

Court of Appeals of Michigan.

Submitted Dec. 10, 1987.

Decided Feb. 9, 1988.

Released for Publication July 7, 1988.

[168 MICHAPP 518] Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Louis J. Caruso, Sol. Gen., Joseph P. Kwiatkowski, Pros. Atty., and Deborah K. Canja, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the People.

Lewinski & Brewster, P.C. by Paul M. Brewster, Sault Ste. Marie, for defendant-appellant on appeal.

[168 MICHAPP 519] Before MAHER, P.J., and GRIBBS and SIMMONS, ^* JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals as of right from his conviction for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor, second offense, M.C.L. Sec. 257.625; M.S.A Sec. 9.2325. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in admitting the results of defendant's blood alcohol test. We affirm.

On the evening of his arrest, defendant refused a Breathalyzer test. He consented, however, to a blood alcohol test and was taken to Community Hospital in Cheboygan. A blood sample was taken at the hospital by Peggy Ann Wisley, who identified herself as a laboratory technician. Wisley admitted that she was not a certified technician, having failed her certification test. She explained that she had been trained by laboratory personnel to take blood samples and had been withdrawing blood as part of her duties for seven years. Wisley further testified that the blood was withdrawn in accordance with standard procedure which includes applying a tourniquet, cleaning the area with Betadine, a nonalcohol solution, and using a specially prepared blood sample collection kit provided by the police department. No medical doctor was present when she drew the sample from defendant. Richard Bedell, a laboratory technologist, testified that the laboratory was supervised by Dr. Otto, the hospital's chief pathologist. Dr. Otto had directed medical technicians in the lab, such as Wisley, to withdraw blood when requested by the police. Defendant objected to the admission of the blood sample results, arguing that Wisley was not a medical technician and that the sample had not been drawn under the direction of a licensed physician. [168 MICHAPP 520] Finding that the statute governing the withdrawal of a blood sample for alcohol testing had been substantially complied with, the trial court admitted the test results.

M.C.L. Sec. 257.625a(4); M.S.A. Sec. 9.2325(1)(4) provides:

"A sample or specimen of urine or breath shall be taken and collected in a reasonable manner. Only a licensed physician, or a licensed nurse or medical technician under the direction of a licensed physician and qualified to withdraw blood acting in a medical environment, at the request of a peace officer, may withdraw blood for the purpose of determining the amount of alcohol or presence of a controlled substance or both in the person's blood, as provided in this act."

We will first address defendant's claim that the results of his test were inadmissible because Wisley was not a medical technician. Language used in statutes is to be given its ordinary meaning unless a different interpretation is indicated. Goethal v. Kent County Supervisors, 361 Mich. 104, 111, 104 N.W.2d 794 (1960). The term "medical technician" has not been defined by the statute. The American Heritage Dictionary, New College Edition (1978), defines "medical" as "of or pertaining to the study or practice of medicine." "Technician" is defined as "a person whose occupation requires training in a specific technical process." Here, Wisley was given special training in drawing blood samples for the purpose of use in the practice of medicine. Although she called herself a laboratory technician, we believe that her occupation falls within the commonly accepted definition of medical technician.

We further find that defendant's blood sample was drawn "under the direction of a licensed physician." Section 625a previously required that [168 MICHAPP 521] blood samples be drawn by a licensed physician or a registered nurse acting ...