Supreme Court: Police Usually Need Warrant for Blood Alcohol Tests
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that police
generally need a search warrant before they order a blood alcohol test
for someone suspected of drunk driving.
The case centered on Tyler McNeely, who was pulled over for speeding
by a Missouri highway patrolman, and was taken to a hospital. About 25
minutes after McNeely was pulled over, a technician measured his
blood-alcohol content at 0.154 percent, nearly twice the legal limit.
The Missouri police in the case argued they should not have to wait
for approval to give a blood test, because alcohol dissipates quickly in
the bloodstream. Last year, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected that
argument. It ruled the blood test violated the Fourth Amendment. The
court found there were no special circumstances to justify obtaining the
blood test so quickly. State high courts in Iowa and Utah also have
made similar rulings.
Writing for the Supreme Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted the
natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood is generally not sufficient
reason to abandon the requirement that police get a judge’s approval
before obtaining a blood sample.
Warrantless blood tests are prohibited in about half the states in most or all suspected drunk driving cases, the Associated Press reports.