Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Warrants for Taking a Blood Sample
Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that police officers are required to obtain a search warrant before a blood sample is collected from a suspected DWI offender. The ruling emerged from a state court case, Missouri vs. McNeely (PDF), in which the Missouri Supreme Court held that a warrant was required to take a blood sample, unless exigent circumstances existed making a warrantless search necessary.
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the Missouri Court and, in their written opinion, specifically held that:
In drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not constitute an exigency in every case sufficient to justify conducting a blood test without a warrant.
A number of amicus briefs were filed with the Supreme Court prior to the decision, including one by the organization, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (PDF), that opposed the warrant requirement, and the National College for DUI Defense (PDF) that argued in favor of securing warrants in DWI cases.
So, what do you think? Did the Supreme Court get it right? Vote in this week’s poll and see the results for yourself!