HIGH COURT SAYS NO BLOOD TEST WITHOUT A WARRANT FOR DUI

 Posted on December 00, 0000 in Chicago criminal defense lawyer

On April 17, 2013, the United States Supreme Court held that any person who is suspected of driving under the influence cannot be automatically subjected to blood testing without a warrant and without consent.

It has been routine practice in the State of Illinois for an officer to transport a person suspected of driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol to a hospital to submit to a blood draw for purposes of procuring evidence.  This situation almost always arises when the incident is accident related, and frequently occurs after there has been a refusal to submit to a breath test.

With the United States Supreme Court ruling in Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11-1425, it is even more important now for an individual to exercise his 4^th Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure and refuse to submit to such requested blood testing.

In McNeely, the Court concluded that, in drunk driving investigations, the natural metabolization of alcohol in the bloodstream does not constitute an exigency in every case, a per se exigency, sufficient to justify conducting a blood test without a warrant. P. 1.  Rather, this matter must be “determined case by case based on the totality of the circumstances.” P. 1.

Pursuant to the United States Supreme Court’s ruling, if there is not an emergency situation, or exigent circumstances, arising at the time of the arrest, then an officer would be required to procure a warrant before an individual refusing to consent to a blood draw could be forced to submit.

For sound legal advice about Driving Under the Influence, contact the attorneys at Kathryn L. Harry & Associates, P.C. at 630-472-9700 or  CLICK HERE!