Brianna's Law Passed
If we look at previous court case decisions, for example, Missouri v. Mcneely we might ask if Brianna's Law is in fact violating the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In Missouri v. McNeely around 2 a.m. on October 3, 2012, Mr. McNeely was pulled over for speeding in Missouri. After failing many tests of sobriety he was asked to take an alcohol breath test which McNeely refused to give. From there he was transported to a clinic where the staff administered a blood test without Mr. McNeelys consent. The test proved that Mr. McNeelys BAC was well above the alcohol level and he was charged with a DUI. At trial the judge ruled in McNeely's favor saying that administering a blood test without the consent of the person was in fact a violation against the Fourth Amendment. Prosecutors appealed and argued that doing the test without a warrant was justified because delaying the test to get a warrant would destruct the evidence. The stated appeals court agreed and reversed the trial court decision, but the Missouri Supreme Court reversed that decision again saying that the test was not justified. The US Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari on September 25, 2012. They agreed with the Missouri Supreme Court that the drawing of blood involuntarily is a "search" that is used in the Fourth Amendment and a warrant is generally required.
If you or a loved one are facing criminal charges in Reno or Lake Tahoe areas, contact Joey Gilbert Lawto discuss your rights. Call (775) 574-4774