[x_out86]

Just posted, was the SCOTUS decision on Missouri v. McNeely regarding warrantless blood draws as a routine/brightline procedure.

Here is the link:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...-1425_cb8e.pdf

The nickle tour version for you guys who dont want to read it is:

Conducting a warrantless non-consentual blood draw as standard procedure with no other exigent circumstances other than the natural dissipation of a persons BAC, is a No No. They would not issue a brightline rule as if this is ever okay to do or not, but rather said its a case-by-case basis depending on the circumstances at hand.


Now I dont know about you guys, but in my area, getting a search warrant drafted and signed at bar time is usually a pain in the ass. We shall see what we end up doing and what our DA says. I know that we can get an expert to testify as to what the persons BAC was at the time of the offense with formulas, but talk about lots of extra court time.

[DaBigBR]

So we are essentially seeing Schmerber overruled here.

Edit to add:

Not exactly, they're refusing to establish a brightline exigency rule, as discussed above. It's all really irrelevant in my state anyway, since a warrant is required for blood and is only obtained in serious PI or F collision cases.

[JohnnyReb]

I've always disagreed with strapping someone down and putting a needle in their arm without an accident involving serious injury or death.



posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[rockapede]

I've been following this closely since it came out of my state and has directly affected how we do things over the last couple of years. I think it's incorrect, but oh well.

This, ladies and gentlemen, is why you better have a better answer than "I read it in a magazine" when asked on the stand why you did something. Bad cases make bad case law.

[rockapede]

Originally Posted by DaBigBR

So we are essentially seeing Schmerber overruled here.

Edit to add:

Not exactly, they're refusing to establish a brightline exigency rule, as discussed above. It's all really irrelevant in my state anyway, since a warrant is required for blood and is only obtained in serious PI or F collision cases.

It is impossible to prosecute a DWI without breath or blood in my county and several other Missouri counties I am aware of. It's flat out BS that this is the case as the following is the exact wording of the statute:

"A person commits the crime of "driving while intoxicated" if he operates a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated or drugged condition."

A specific BAC is NOT required. Good luck telling your average "I'm a small county prosecutor because I couldn't cut it as a defense lawyer" prosecutor that, though. Level of observable and documented impairment, which IS part of the actual statute, is meaningless without a BAC.

I had a refusal this weekend. Took me two and a half hours to get a warrant. I blew half my shift on one misdemeanor arrest.

[razdog76]

Originally Posted by JohnnyReb

I've always disagreed with strapping someone down and putting a needle in their arm without an accident involving serious injury or death.



posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

I agree completely. Anymore, I could care less about a win in court. Its not rocket science for PC to make an arrest, and ask for a chemical test. According to my state law, if they refuse its at least a one year suspension.

If they want to spend mucho denaro to beat my case, I won't lose any sleep over it since I got them off the street, got their license, and they will spend more to avoid a conviction, then fines, court costs, insurance... If they refuse its less paperwork for me.

[Dukeboy01]

Originally Posted by rockapede
I had a refusal this weekend. Took me two and a half hours to get a warrant. I blew half my shift on one misdemeanor arrest.

Which goes to prove that despite the best efforts of MADD and all of the talking out of both sides of their mouths, the lawyers and the legislators, as well as the voters who elected them, don't give a crap about DUI. If we, as a society, did care about it, it would be a Felony.

Screw it. Charge 'em with Reckless Driving- Had Been Drinking, dump 'em at the jail, and get back on the road.

[steveksux]

What about implied consent as condition of acquiring drivers license?

I thought you had to submit to breath test, or automatically lose license, at least in MI. Can't something similar be passed for blood draw, or is that too invasive? Wouldn't breath be sufficient?

Randy

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[jedi573]

In Missouri, implied consent already covers two types of tests. So I can ask for breath and blood, sure. If they refuse, though, the application for a warrant can be a pain at 0 drunk thirty.

Andy

[JohnnyReb]

Originally Posted by jedi573

In Missouri, implied consent already covers two types of tests. So I can ask for breath and blood, sure. If they refuse, though, the application for a warrant can be a pain at 0 drunk thirty.

Andy

Why bother with a warrant? You are charging the suspect with DWI. That charge is based on observations that they are impaired. BAC is irrelevant.

Just as if someone is driving under the influence of narcotics, and a DRE isn't available, and in the absence of other evidence.

BAC is additional evidence, but not required for a conviction.



posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[blueiron]

All this does in my area is mandate warrants for every DUI. Breath tests went away years ago. The on call commissioners/judges are going to be very busy.

[rockapede]

Originally Posted by JohnnyReb

Why bother with a warrant? You are charging the suspect with DWI. That charge is based on observations that they are impaired. BAC is irrelevant.

Just as if someone is driving under the influence of narcotics, and a DRE isn't available, and in the absence of other evidence.

BAC is additional evidence, but not required for a conviction.



posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

His county may be similar to mine (see my post above). DWI - BAC = declined prosecution.

[JohnnyReb]

Originally Posted by rockapede

His county may be similar to mine (see my post above). DWI - BAC = declined prosecution.

That's incredibly stupid, and that's not the legal standard. What a shame.

[JohnnyReb]

Originally Posted by blueiron

All this does in my area is mandate warrants for every DUI. Breath tests went away years ago. The on call commissioners/judges are going to be very busy.

Why did they go away?

[rockapede]

Originally Posted by JohnnyReb

That's incredibly stupid, and that's not the legal standard. What a shame.

There's just too much money tied up in it for the courts to take a hard line.

[Agent6-3/8]

Originally Posted by Dukeboy01

Which goes to prove that despite the best efforts of MADD and all of the talking out of both sides of their mouths, the lawyers and the legislators, as well as the voters who elected them, don't give a crap about DUI. If we, as a society, did care about it, it would be a Felony.

Screw it. Charge 'em with Reckless Driving- Had Been Drinking, dump 'em at the jail, and get back on the road.

Agreed! The way DUI's are handled is little more than a money making scheme, IMO

Blueiron, no Intoximeter or similar?


Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk

[rockapede]

Here's how screwed up DWI is in Missouri: first offense DWI is a class B misdemeanor (like speeding 20 mph over the limit). Second offense is a class A misdemeanor. Know what else is a class A misdemeanor? Littering.

We can't win for losing here. Still enjoy hooking drunks, though.

[BamaTrooper]

Originally Posted by rockapede

His county may be similar to mine (see my post above). DWI - BAC = dumb@$$ prosecutors.

Fixed it to be applicable to certain jurisdictions.

[Morris]

It all changes when a judge's spouse gets killed by a deuce . . .

[mntrpr]

In MN refusing a test on a 1st time DUI absent any other aggravating factors is a higher level of offense than the DUI itself.

We only force blood when our criminal vehicular operation laws are violated, e.g., impairment and injury to another in a crash.

[ClydeG19]

Originally Posted by rockapede

I had a refusal this weekend. Took me two and a half hours to get a warrant. I blew half my shift on one misdemeanor arrest.

Thank you. There aren't many crimes that tick me off the way dui's do. Here in AZ, your run of the mill dui is a misdemeanor as well, but we've got very harsh punishment even on the first offense. IID's have to be installed in the vehicle after the first offense.

That being said, yeah...strapping someone down to forcibly draw blood with or without a warrant for a misdemeanor is pretty invasive. AZ has gone almost exclusively blood though because of a few recent incidents where slews of cases were thrown out because of intoxilyzers that weren't calibrated, not calibrated correctly, etc. I know an officer that was suspended for a while for just such a failure to maintain the machine he was tasked with maintaining.

[x_out86]

Originally Posted by rockapede

Here's how screwed up DWI is in Missouri: first offense DWI is a class B misdemeanor (like speeding 20 mph over the limit). Second offense is a class A misdemeanor. Know what else is a class A misdemeanor? Littering.

We can't win for losing here. Still enjoy hooking drunks, though.

If that makes you mad, don't even ask how OWI's are classified in Wisconsin...

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[lawman800]

I love refusals, much easier than a deuce. Just take great notes and record the refusal and submit as such. Automatic revocation of license.

[Morris]

I wish it were an automatic revocation here. A refusal in Washington can lead to an IID license, a review by the DOL, and the strong likelihood a deuce will keep their license.

[merlynusn]

Our DAs won't prosecute a DWI without breath or blood. An Ignition Interlock is only required if the BAC is above a .15 here. And the DWIs are all misdemeanors unless you have x number of convictions in y number of years (I don't remember the numbers because it's irrelevant at the street level).

ETA: A refusal results in a mandatory 1 year license suspension.

You have to ensure you have enough PC without the breathalyzer in case they refuse. Some idiots rely on the BAC for their PC. Which will screw them over eventually.