Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

MarlinsBaseball.com

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Forced blood tests allowed to stand

Featured Replies

Add another warrant exception to the long list. It never ceases to amaze me how much theyve dwindled down the 4th amendment right against warrantless search.

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court declined to consider Tuesday whether a police officer may take a blood test from a suspected drunken driver without a warrant.

 

Justices let stand a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling that said a forced blood test would not violate the driver's Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable searches, even if the driver already had submitted to a breath test.

 

The lower court reasoned that police's urgent need to obtain reliable evidence before alcohol dissipates from a driver's bloodstream justified a warrantless blood test.

 

The case stems from a traffic stop in February 2002. Police stopped Jacob Faust and gave him a preliminary breath test that showed a 0.13 blood alcohol content.

 

Faust also gave a second breath test at the police department.

 

That test showed a blood alcohol content of 0.09, just above the 0.08 limit Faust was to adhere to because he had two prior drunken driving convictions.

 

Police then took a blood test from Faust at a hospital without his consent. That test showed a 0.10 level.

 

The trial court granted Faust's motion to suppress the results of the blood test after he argued there was no urgent need to justify the blood draw without a warrant.

 

But the Wisconsin Supreme Court disagreed, ruling that police had a right since they can't predict whether a breath test will be found reliable in court.

 

The case is Faust v. Wisconsin, 04-471.

Thatll make it to the supreme court. In my opinion police should not be able to do any of that stuff w/o a warrant. It may slow down the process but the police too often charge innocent people with many of those strict liability laws. For example, in many cases its the police officers word against the accused, in whic hthe officer always wins. Police should not have that much power. If its speeding they should always have to show the calibrations on the radar gun and so forth.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...
Background Picker
Customize Layout

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.