Routine blood draw under a warrant does not require a “clear indication,” only probable cause

Schmerber only requires probable cause for a routine blood draw and not a “clear indication.” Here, defendant was linked to a 1973 murder by an AFIS hit on an old fingerprint on a tissue box. A search warrant was obtained for the blood. “Accordingly, we conclude that a search warrant for the taking of a routine blood sample by a medically qualified person satisfies the requirements of the fourth amendment when the warrant is supported by probable cause.” State v. Grant, 286 Conn. 499, 944 A.2d 947 (2008).

Defendant relied on a discredited prior case as the reason why defense counsel should have filed a motion to suppress. Since the motion would not have prevailed, no IAC. People v. Echols, 382 Ill. App. 3d 309, 887 N.E.2d 793 (2d Dist. 2008).*

Nebraska probation agreement included provision that defendant was subject to probation searches by any PO or law enforcement officer, so this LEO search was valid. State v. Colby, 16 Neb. App. 644, 748 N.W.2d 118 (2008).*

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.