MN: Limited right to counsel before blood test doesn’t apply to SW blood draws

“The limited right to counsel established in Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 473 N.W.2d 828 (Minn. 1991), does not apply when an individual is asked to submit to a blood test pursuant to a warrant.” (Syllabus) State v. Rosenbush, 2019 Minn. LEXIS 376 (July 10, 2019):

In sum, the presence of a warrant ameliorates the concerns that we articulated in Friedman. We are confident that conducting a search pursuant to a lawful warrant adequately safeguards the “human rights [and] human dignity” about which we were concerned in Friedman and supplies meaningful “procedural protection for the rights of the criminally accused.” Id. at 836. Thus, we see no reason to extend the limited right to counsel announced in Friedman to the execution of a search warrant for a suspected impaired driver’s blood.

We hold that the limited right to counsel under the Minnesota Constitution recognized in Friedman does not apply when a driver is presented with the choice to submit-or not to submit-to a blood test pursuant to a search warrant. Accordingly, the district court erred in suppressing the blood-test results on that ground.

This entry was posted in Drug or alcohol testing. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.