South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley held a meeting Friday with the States Attorney’s executive committee to discuss a recent Supreme Court decision that gives some guidance to the laws dealing with blood draws for DUI’s. His office and the South Dakota State Attorney’s committee has been working to put together a guide for local law enforcement and the highway patrol to address that decision…
The U-S supreme court ruled on April 17 in a 5-4 decision that, in drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream doesn’t always justify the need to conduct a blood test without a warrant. The case was based on an incident in Missouri where a police officer pulled over an individual on suspicion of drunk driving. After refusing the blood-alcohol breath test at the scene the individual was transferred to a local hospital for the test, where he again refused the procedure. The defendant moved to suppress the blood test results arguing it was warrantless, nonconsensual and violated the Fourth Amendment. Both the trial court and the Missouri Supreme Court agreed stating that more than the mere dissipation of blood-alcohol evidence is needed to support a warrantless blood draw in an alcohol-related case. The recent U-S Supreme Court decision affirms the Missouri court’s action.