TX3: DUI blood draw while in restraint chair not 4A unreasonable

Taking defendant’s blood for DUI at the station house by warrant when he was in a restraint chair didn’t make the search unreasonable. Hildebrandt v. State, 2026 Tex. App. LEXIS 5866 (Tex. App. – Austin June 25, 2026).

A Ring doorbell camera should have caught these events, but it was missing. Police used a search warrant to Ring to get the video from the cloud. State v. Guccione , 2026 La. App. LEXIS 1233 (La. App. 3 Cir. June 17, 2026).*

“Overall, the district court concluded that the search of the vehicle was lawful under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment because Mr. Lindsey ‘refused to pull over immediately despite several opportunities to do so; the police observed [him] make furtive movements as if hiding objects; [he] made a left turn, slowed, and accelerated as if looking for a place to bail and run; [he] refused to speak to the officers when they first approached his vehicle; [he] fumbled with his keys and restarted his engine be-fore turning it off again; and [he] spontaneously disclaimed owner-ship of the vehicle when the police stated their intent to search it.’” United States v. Lindsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 18423 (11th Cir. June 24, 2026).* [Watch some sovereign citizen traffic stops on YouTube. Refusal to open the door or roll down the window is common. Here, doing that contributed to reasonable suspicion defendant was armed or had contraband.]

This entry was posted in Automobile exception, Computer and cloud searches, Warrant execution. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.