CA8: Implied consent law is not coercive of consent

Plaintiff’s summary judgment against her for her consensual blood draw in the face of the state’s implied consent law is affirmed. “‘[T]he choice to submit or refuse to take a blood-alcohol test will not be an easy or pleasant one for a suspect to make[, b]ut the criminal process often requires suspects and defendants to make difficult choices.’ Neville, 459 U.S. at 564. Wall’s choice was undoubtedly difficult in view of the penalties of refusal, but the implied consent procedure is an important ‘legal tool[]’ states have at their disposal ‘to enforce their drunk-driving laws and secure BAC evidence.’ McNeely, 569 U.S. at ___, 133 S. Ct. at 1566 (plurality opinion). Wall’s dilemma, alone, does not satisfy her burden of nullifying her otherwise uninhibited consent. See Der, 666 F.3d at 1128.” Wall v. Stanek, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12527 (8th Cir. July 21, 2015).