OH9: ER’s blood draw for medical diagnosis didn’t require compliance with statute on DWI blood draws

Defendant was in a fatal accident and taken to the ER. The state trooper there tried to get him to consent to a blood test, and he declined. While the officer went to get a search warrant for this blood, a nurse in the ER took his blood for medical treatment purposes. The blood draw taken by the hospital was admissible at his trial. Substantial compliance with the DWI blood draw statute isn’t required if a hospital does the testing for medical purposes. State v. Bugg, 2018-Ohio-2544, 2018 Ohio App. LEXIS 2763 (9th Dist. June 29, 2018).

The GPS tracking warrant was issued with probable cause. Defendants assert that a more comprehensive investigation was required before doing so, but still there was probable cause. A telephonic tracking warrant was issued under California law, and it was valid from its authorization despite the lack of a written document at the time it was started. United States v. Takatsy, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 110071 (D. Ariz. July 2, 2018).*

This entry was posted in Drug or alcohol testing, GPS / Tracking Data. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.