Arizona Court Of Appeals Ruling: Clear Consent Needed For DUI Blood Tests

A new Arizona Court ruling says authorities must obtain a search warrant to conduct a blood test of a DUI suspect unless the suspect clearly consents. The state Court of Appeals ruled on September 1, 2009, that it wasn't enough under state law that a man apparently didn't object when officers moved to take a blood sample while in a police DUI van. The ruling comes out of a case in which a man was pulled over and arrested for DUI. He was vomiting and could not participate in a blood test, so as he was sitting on the steps of the DUI van, officers drew blood. But the driver did not speak English and the officers did not speak Spanish. In Court, he claimed that the officers grabbed his arm and that he did not resist because he was afraid. But neither did he give consent. A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that the police officers acted within the law. The driver appealed. The Court notes that the law in question is called "implied consent" because in Arizona, drivers are subject to a civil driver's license suspension if they refuse to have blood drawn. But the ruling says motorists clearly still have the right to withhold consent for a warrantless search. The Court of Appeals sent the case back to a lower Court for a finding on whether the man involved consented.

The information in this blog is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. Please contact us to obtain legal advice pertaining to your situation.