Dell was driving his car at night on an unlighted winding country road when, without slowing down, he struck a pedestrian who was walking on the shoulder of the road adjacent to a field. The posted speed limit for the road was 30 miles per hour. Officer arrived at the scene of the accident 15 minutes later and found Dell sitting in his car in the field. Without giving Dell any Miranda warnings, Officer asked him why his car was in the field, and Dell said that he was driving down the road and his car hit something. Officer noticed that Dells eyes were glassy, his speech was slurred, and his breath had a strong odor of alcohol. When Dell exited the car at Officers direction, he could not stand without holding onto the car. Dell refused Officers request that he take a breath test to determine the percentage of alcohol in his blood. An ambulance arrived, and the pedestrian was pronounced dead.

Officer arrested Dell and took him to the police station. Officer then appeared before a judge who, based upon the above facts, issued an order for a chemical test of Dells blood. The blood test was administered and showed Dells blood alcohol level to be substantially above the legal limit for driving while intoxicated.

Dell was indicted for the crime of manslaughter in the second degree. A person is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree when he recklessly causes the death of another person. Prior to the trial, Dell moved to suppress the results of the blood test on the ground that it was improperly authorized. He also moved to suppress his statement -that he was driving down the road and his car hit something - because he was not given Miranda warnings. The court (a) granted Dells motion to suppress the results of the blood test and (b) denied Dells motion to suppress his statement. Uncontroverted testimony as to all of the above facts, except the blood test results, was received at the trial. In addition, an expert testified, based on his observations and measurements at the scene, that Dells car was travelling in excess of 55 miles per hour when it left the road and struck the pedestrian.

After both sides rested, Dell made a motion (1) to dismiss the indictment on the grounds that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish the crime of manslaughter in the second degree, and (2) in the alternative, to submit to the jury a charge of criminally negligent homicide as a lesser-included offense. A person is guilty of criminally negligent homicide when, with criminal negligence, he causes the death of another person. The court denied the motion in both respects. Dell was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree.

(1) Was the court correct in its pre-trial determinations:

(a) to suppress the results of the blood test?

(b) not to suppress Dells statement?