WA: PC for intoxication is what must be shown, not particularly drug or alcohol

In a felony DUI case under, probable cause to suspect drug intoxication did not have to be identified separately from probable cause to suspect alcohol intoxication, and the affidavit for the warrant was sufficient. The warrant had sufficient particularity to authorize blood testing. The warrant was supported by probable cause to believe that defendant’s blood contained evidence of DUI, and it authorized not merely the drawing and storing of a blood sample, but also the toxicology tests performed to detect the presence of drugs or alcohol. The search did not exceed the bounds of the warrant when a sample of defendant’s blood was extracted and tested for intoxicants. State v. Martines, 2015 Wash. LEXIS 896 (August 27, 2015).

Even though defendant signed a consent form, the court finds the consent involuntary. “The undersigned finds that, while this is a close question, Defendant’s consent was not voluntary based on the totality of circumstances, and grants Defendant’s motion to suppress the physical evidence seized from the apartment residence.” The government did not meet its burden. United States v. Hernandez, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114979 (W.D.N.C. July 28, 2015).*