Section 14.27 Missouri Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus Cases

• Library: DWI 2014

In State v. Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702 (Mo. App. W.D. 1993), overruled on other grounds by State v. Carson, 941 S.W.2d 518 (Mo. banc 1997), the court found that the HGN test meets the Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), standard of admissibility. Hill, 865 S.W.2d at 704; see also State v. Myers, 940 S.W.2d 64 (Mo. App. S.D. 1997). Although the HGN test is admissible as circumstantial evidence of intoxication upon presentation of adequate foundation in a prosecution for a DWI offense, the results of an HGN test are inadmissible to establish that a driver’s BAC was at, above, or below a specific degree. Hill, 865 S.W.2d at 705; State v. Rose, 86 S.W.3d 90, 100 (Mo. App. W.D. 2002). To present an adequate foundation for the admission of the HGN test, the state must show “1) that the officer is adequately trained to administer such test and render an opinion; and 2) that the test was properly administered.” Rose, 86 S.W.3d at 98. See Hill, 865 S.W.2d at 704; Duffy v. Dir. of Revenue, 966 S.W.2d 372, 378–79 (Mo. App. W.D. 1998).

Hill, 865 S.W.2d 702, provides that adequate training on administering and interpreting the...