Ms. Spano Case Summary

To determine if Ms. Spano was operating her vehicle while intoxicated the court will apply a four- factored test and the relevant Indiana code to the facts. After applying the factors, the court will probably weigh in favor of Ms. Spano operating the car. Ind. Code 9-30-5-3 states, “… a person who operates a vehicle while intoxicated…”. Ind. Code 9-13-2-118 defines operator as “driver or is in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon a highway...” The Hiegel test helps determine operation: “(1) whether or not the person in the vehicle was asleep or awake; (2) whether or not the motor was running; (3) the location of the vehicles and all the circumstances bearing on how the vehicle arrived at that location; and (4) the intent of the person behind the wheel” Hiegel v. State, N.E.d 265 (Ind. Ct. App. 1989). Since factor one is not outcome determinate only factors two through four will be analyzed.
To determine whether or not the motor is running courts will look at what gear the car was in, whether the engine was on or off, and auxiliary functions. …show more content…
In Nicholas v. State, the officer testified “that the car was in neutral at all times” Nicholas v. State, 783 N.E.2d 1210. Nicholas was found to not be operating the car. Though he had applied the brake, the car was in neutral, so he applied it to stop, not operate, the car. Hiegel v. State precedent this when the court ruled that though Hiegel had started his engine and his auxiliary functions were on, his car was in park, and he hadn’t operated the car. In Shaw v. State he was convicted of operating but his car was found to be in gear and