Posted on 02/11/2015 8:05:17 PM PST by TurboZamboni
Despite national court decisions limiting police in obtaining a blood-alcohol sample without a warrant, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that doing so doesn’t violate the state and U.S. Constitutions.
As a result, in Minnesota, a suspected drunken driver can still be charged with refusing a breath or blood test if arresting officers believe there’s enough evidence to get a search warrant to require the test — even if they don’t obtain the warrant. Only a few states have a similar implied-consent law.
The issue, which reached the state Supreme Court in a case involving William Bernard Jr., has been hotly debated by prosecutors, defense attorneys and legal experts.
Some believe implied consent is key in keeping impaired drivers off the road. But critics say it criminalizes a person’s right to constitutional protections against a warrantless search and could extend beyond drunken-driving cases.
In the majority opinion, Chief Justice Lorie Skjerven Gildea said Bernard’s warrantless breath test was legal under an exception allowing police to search a suspect in the interest of officer safety or to prevent evidence destruction.
But a blistering joint dissent by Justices Alan Page and David Stras accused the court of departing from Fourth Amendment principles, saying the ruling nullifies the warrant requirement in nearly every drunken-driving case.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Not exactly new.
More interesting is that a number of police departments are trying to publicly trying pressure google to get rid of the waze navigation app report police location function. Even hinted of possible lawsuits.
google naturally scoffed at the idea, having the higher ground.
Depart? They don’t need blood. Unless the courts have screwed with evidence to the point the cops observations are not good enough.
> google naturally scoffed at the idea, having the higher ground.
and billion$ in cash to pay lawyers.
Alan Page. Notre Dame All America. Good on you!!!
.
This shouldn’t happen unless someone is being very belligerent, combative and/or has caused a serious accident.
You also go to jail for SPANKING your kid in Minnesota...
The rights of individuals must bow to the rights of the Collective, komrade!
IIRC, the US SCOTUS already ruled this violates the 4th Amendment.
This goes back to the correct position on a driver’s license holding that it is “privilege not a right.” And “privilege not a right” causes problems for liberals wanting to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. Let them use this tactic because eventually it will come to a question of a privilege or a right which might help us.
This goes back to the correct position on a driver’s license holding that it is “privilege not a right.” And “privilege not a right” causes problems for liberals wanting to give driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. Let them use this tactic because eventually it will come to a question of a privilege or a right which might help us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.