from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central
Judicial District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge.
K. Neufeld, Assistant State's Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for
plaintiff and appellee.
L. Herbel, Bismarck, ND, for defendant and appellant.
1] Alexis Dowdy appeals from a judgment entered after she
conditionally pled guilty to driving under the influence of
alcohol. Dowdy argues the arresting officer improperly added
inaccurate and coercive language to the statutorily required
implied consent advisory, and she did not voluntarily consent
to chemical testing. The district court found Dowdy was read
a complete implied consent advisory and she voluntarily
consented to chemical testing. We affirm.
2] North Dakota Highway Patrol Officer Jeremy Rost stopped
Dowdy in Bismarck for making an improper turn. Dowdy admitted
she consumed five alcoholic beverages. After administering
field sobriety tests, Rost arrested Dowdy for driving under
the influence. Rost read Dowdy the North Dakota implied
consent advisory and took her to the Burleigh Morton
detention center for a chemical breath test. The test
revealed Dowdy's blood alcohol concentration of 0.168
3] Dowdy moved to suppress the results of her chemical breath
test, arguing Rost did not read her an accurate implied
consent advisory. She also argued she did not voluntarily
consent to the breath test. The district court denied
Dowdy's motion after reviewing the evidence, including a
video of the traffic stop. The court found Rost read her an
accurate and complete implied consent advisory and she
voluntarily consented to the breath test. Dowdy conditionally
pled guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol.
4] Our standard of review for a district court's decision
on a motion to suppress evidence is well established:
"When reviewing a district court's ruling on a
motion to suppress, we defer to the district court's
findings of fact and resolve conflicts in testimony in favor
of affirmance. We affirm the district court's decision
unless we conclude there is insufficient competent evidence
to support the decision, or unless the decision goes against
the manifest weight of the evidence."
State v. James, 2016 ND 68, ¶ 5, 876 N.W.2d 720
(quoting City of Dickinson v. Hewson, 2011 ND 187,
¶ 6, 803 N.W.2d 814). Whether a finding of fact meets a
legal standard is a question of law, which is fully
reviewable on appeal. State v. White, 2018 ND 266,
¶ 6, 920 N.W.2d 742.
5] Dowdy argues the district court erred in denying her
motion to suppress because Rost read her an inaccurate
implied consent advisory. She also claims her consent to the
chemical breath test was not voluntary because Rost's