TX13: Suspending a DL for refusal of a blood test doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment

Suspending a DL for refusal of a blood test doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment. Rankin v. Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 5785 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi – Edinburg June 2, 2016)*:

In sum, we conclude that suspending Rankin’s driver’s license based on his refusal of a breath test does not violate his right to be free from unreasonable searches. Instead, such reasonable regulation addresses a compelling state interest in the use of the public roadways. See Coyle, 775 S.W.2d at 847. Moreover, under the facts of this case, there is no question presented to this Court about whether exigent circumstances justified the nonconsensual search of Rankin’s breath because there was no nonconsensual search of Rankin’s breath. See McNeely, 133 S. Ct. at 1556. And this Court declines to “stretch” McNeely to apply the warrant requirement to the implied consent statutes, as Rankin urges. Instead, McNeely favorably recognized such regulations as those at issue in this case. See id. at 1565-66; see also Turcios v. Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety, No. 13-14-00332-CV, ___ WL ___, at * __ (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi May __, 2016, no pet. h.) (mem. op.).