Tennessee to roll out “No Refusal” blood-draw DUI checkpoints for Labor Day

[lawboy]

That doesn't make it right. They still violate the 4th amendment by forcing people to submit to questioning when there is no evidence of a law having been broken.

The "initial" stop is basically considered "de minimus", such as an order to exit car under Mimms, so at least initially the 4th is not violated, for arguments sake, routine questioning of a DUI suspect (post stop with RS) also does not trigger Miranda warnings.

 

[Caine]

Any "warrantless" blood draw must conform to the recent Missouri v. McNeely, while the SC left open the door to exigency, a warrant is most generally required.

I have done many warrantless blood draws that have been won in court (many of them challenged... so it isn't just some broke guy pleading out), but I worked in the far south part of my county, in a county where obtaining a warrant would often delay blood collection for more than two hours (over .03 estimated loss in BAC result, based on studies conducted by NHTSA that the average elimination rate is .0165).

 

[lawboy]

I have done many warrantless blood draws that have been won in court (many of them challenged... so it isn't just some broke guy pleading out), but I worked in the far south part of my county, in a county where obtaining a warrant would often delay blood collection for more than two hours (over .03 estimated loss in BAC result, based on studies conducted by NHTSA that the average elimination rate is .0165).

How many before McNeely?

 

[ksu_aviator]

The "initial" stop is basically considered "de minimus", such as an order to exit car under Mimms, so at least initially the 4th is not violated, for arguments sake, routine questioning of a DUI suspect (post stop with RS) also does not trigger Miranda warnings.

Mimms does not apply. Under PA v Mimms the officer had reasonable suspicion for the stop. Mimms was stopped for having expired plates. That precipitated the search which also yielded a concealed weapon.

Under DUI check points, there is no reasonable suspicion.

 

[Caine]

How many before McNeely?

All of them. Because I was only a LEO for another month after that ruling before I left the department.

 

[lawboy]

Mimms does not apply. Under PA v Mimms the officer had reasonable suspicion for the stop. Mimms was stopped for having expired plates. That precipitated the search which also yielded a concealed weapon.

Under DUI check points, there is no reasonable suspicion.

You can still be ordered out of the car, the same with a passenger, Maryland v. Wilson.

Also, a search can be valid whether it was a Terry Stop or a checkpoint, depends on the POST facts.