AZ: DUI on scene blood draw was not unreasonable

The DUI scene blood draw by an Arizona State Police phlebotomist was reasonable on these facts, so it did not violate Schmerber. The program as a whole had already been sustained, and the trial court erred in holding that it caused an unreasonable search. State v. Noceo, 223 Ariz. 222, 221 P.3d 1036 (Ct. App. 2009):

¶8 Here, we are presented with facts nearly identical to those in May, yet the trial court suppressed the evidence based on its findings regarding the phlebotomy program as a whole rather than the circumstances of Noceo’s blood draw in particular. The fundamental question with respect to compelled blood draws and the Fourth Amendment, however, is not whether the blood draw program as a whole is reasonable—a question our state legislature implicitly has answered in A.R.S. §§ 28-1321 and 28-1388—but rather, “whether the means and procedures employed in taking [a suspect’s] blood respected relevant Fourth Amendment standards of reasonableness.” Schmerber, 384 U.S. at 768. Thus, the trial court erred as a matter of law by evaluating the entire DPS phlebotomy program instead of the reasonableness of Noceo’s particular blood draw. As a result, it abused its discretion.

¶9 Moreover, even if the trial court’s evaluation of the DPS phlebotomy program had been appropriate, the court’s findings do not appear to be supported by the record.