Ernie Charles Metzner, Appellant v. State of Arkansas, Appellee — Wynne, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting in Part

Summary

Justice Wynne agreed with affirming the convictions but would have concluded that the trial court erred in denying suppression of the blood-alcohol results because the refusal statute plainly stated that no chemical test shall be given after a refusal. He would nevertheless affirm the sentencing order because the error was harmless, as the officer's testimony independently established impairment and the trial court did not rely on the blood-alcohol results. Justice Hart, dissenting, would likewise enforce the statute's plain language and criticized the majority for allowing an unauthorized search.