Missouri v. McNeely - U.S. Supreme Court Holds Police Need Warrant or Consent to Take DWI Suspect's Blood
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Per The New Jersey Law Journal:
"Defense lawyers say they expect to file more suppression motions as a result of a recent, favorable U.S. Supreme Court ruling on drunken driving.
"The court, in Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11-1425, held on April 17 that as a general rule, police must obtain a search warrant or consent in order to extract blood from a driver to test for alcohol.
"Previously, the fact that the passage of time would cause a drop in blood-alcohol levels was deemed a sufficient exigency to justify an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement for searches.
"Under McNeely, however, the drop in levels may support an exigency finding in a particular case but does not do so categorically."
Justice Sotomayor wrote for a divided Court.
Full article and McNeely decision after the jump...
"Defense lawyers say they expect to file more suppression motions as a result of a recent, favorable U.S. Supreme Court ruling on drunken driving.
"The court, in Missouri v. McNeely, No. 11-1425, held on April 17 that as a general rule, police must obtain a search warrant or consent in order to extract blood from a driver to test for alcohol.
"Previously, the fact that the passage of time would cause a drop in blood-alcohol levels was deemed a sufficient exigency to justify an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement for searches.
"Under McNeely, however, the drop in levels may support an exigency finding in a particular case but does not do so categorically."
Justice Sotomayor wrote for a divided Court.
Full article and McNeely decision after the jump...