If police took a blood sample from you while you were unconscious in a hospital bed and incapable of giving consent, you might wake up feeling violated. If you were suspected of drunk driving, the arresting officers will use your blood sample to find out your blood alcohol content (BAC).
Police officers may resort to a forced blood draw when a driver cannot submit to a breath test. This may happen when a driver passes out while in police custody. During a DUI investigation, officers don’t have much time to record your BAC since the level of alcohol in your system weakens with the passage of time. Thus, the Supreme Court has ruled that, in some situations, police officers can take blood without the suspect’s consent and without a warrant.
How Does the Fourth Amendment Work in DUI Cases?
The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. While they have ruled that a blood draw qualifies as a search and requires a warrant in most cases, in the case of Mitchell v. Wisconsin, the Supreme Court determined that, in some situations, police officers have more important matters to attend to and do not need to secure a warrant to take blood tests.
In Mitchell, petitioner Gerald Mitchell challenged the actions of the Sheboygan Police Department when they decided to administer a blood test while he was unconscious. Before taking Mitchell’s blood, the police officers who arrested him had been notified that he appeared “very drunk” while driving a van. The officers later found Mitchell wandering around outside, and his faculties appeared to be impaired. He failed a roadside breath test and passed out on the way to the station to do a sit-down breath test. Due to the deterioration of his condition, the officers took Mitchell to a hospital where they took his blood. Just 90 minutes after his arrest, Mitchell’s BAC was above 0.22.
In a 5–4 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the officers’ actions and the Wisconsin law that extends implied consent to blood tests for drivers on public roads. This ruling conflicts with previous rulings in which the Supreme Court found that blood tests are a “significant bodily intrusion.” However, the ruling in Mitchell is solidified by the exigent circumstances doctrine.
What are Exigent Circumstances in a DUI Investigation?
Police may only take blood samples when they claim exigent circumstances made it necessary to act quickly. The exigent circumstances doctrine allows police officers to take blood without a warrant when it is “urgent to act and impractical to secure a warrant.” So, in situations where the evidence obtained deteriorates over time—such as your blood alcohol level—it may be acceptable for police to force a blood draw.
“Police officers most frequently come upon unconscious drivers when they report to the scene of an accident, and under those circumstances, the officers’ many responsibilities—such as attending to other injured drivers or passengers and preventing further accidents—may be incompatible with the procedures that would be required to obtain a warrant. Thus, when a driver is unconscious, the general rule is that a warrant is not needed,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote for the plurality.
An example of a situation in which police may apply the exigent circumstances doctrine is in a DUI involving a car crash or at any other time in which a standard arrest evolves into a medical emergency. If a driver is unconscious, they must be rushed to the hospital for monitoring, a blood test to run diagnostics, and immediate treatment. By the time officers get a warrant, the need for medical treatment may delay the blood test or distort the results, reducing the value of the blood sample.
Possible Defenses to a DUI After an Unconscious Blood Draw
Police officers cannot claim that all DUIs they investigate involve exigent circumstances to get out of requesting search warrants. Additionally, not all cases in which police take an unconscious driver’s blood without consent or a warrant are justified. In Mitchell, the Supreme Court stated,
“We do not rule out the possibility that in an unusual case a defendant would be able to show that his blood would not have been drawn if police had not been seeking BAC information, and that police could not have reasonably judged that a warrant application would interfere with other pressing needs or duties.”
Skillful DUI Defense in Palm Beach County
If you were forced to submit to a warrantless blood test in Palm Beach County, attorney Brian P. Gabriel is determined to challenge the evidence police obtained against you. With 30 years of experience, Brian understands the complex inner workings of the criminal justice system in South Florida. His focus on DUI defense has contributed to him becoming a knowledgeable DUI attorney in the area. He understands the scientific processes that can cause BAC samples to be misleading or downright flawed, and will investigate all the facts of your case to ensure that you do not pay for the mistakes of law enforcement.
Call (561) 622-5575 for a free consultation or complete a contact form.