Category Archives: Drug or alcohol testing

Houston Chronicle: 298 wrongful drug convictions identified in ongoing audit

Houston Chronicle: 298 wrongful drug convictions identified in ongoing audit by Lise Olsen and Anita Hassan: In all 298 cases, prosecutors accepted both felony and misdemeanor plea deals before lab tests were performed. The $2 roadside tests, which officers use … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on Houston Chronicle: 298 wrongful drug convictions identified in ongoing audit

GA: Unconscious defendant doesn’t get the implied consent notice

Unconscious defendant doesn’t get the implied consent notice. Bailey v. State, 2016 Ga. App. LEXIS 433 (July 13, 2016).* The officer here had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant’s car after it left a motel with a man and woman inside, … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Reasonable suspicion, Standards of review | Comments Off on GA: Unconscious defendant doesn’t get the implied consent notice

New American: South Dakota Forcibly Catheterizes Suspects Refusing to Submit to Urine Test

New American: South Dakota Forcibly Catheterizes Suspects Refusing to Submit to Urine Test by Joe Wolverton, II: South Dakota Forcibly Catheterizes Suspects Refusing to Submit to Urine Test The state of South Dakota is forcibly catheterizing people who refuse to … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on New American: South Dakota Forcibly Catheterizes Suspects Refusing to Submit to Urine Test

TN: The privilege of driving doesn’t operate as a consent to a blood draw

The privilege of driving doesn’t operate as a consent to a blood draw. The trial court here specifically found no consent, and the record does not preponderate against the finding. There is still no good faith exception in Tennessee. State … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Good faith exception | Comments Off on TN: The privilege of driving doesn’t operate as a consent to a blood draw

NYTimes Magazine: How a $2 Roadside Drug Test Sends Innocent People to Jail

NYTimes Magazine: How a $2 Roadside Drug Test Sends Innocent People to Jail by Ryan Gabrielson and Topher Sander: Widespread evidence shows that these tests routinely produce false positives. Why are police departments and prosecutors across the country still using … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on NYTimes Magazine: How a $2 Roadside Drug Test Sends Innocent People to Jail

Argus Leader: Police use catheters, force to collect urine samples

Argus Leader: Police use catheters, force to collect urine samples by Mark Walker, Patrick Anderson and John Hult: Practice brought to light in recent case out of Pierre; AG says it’s not illegal Police in South Dakota are collecting urine … Continue reading →

Posted in Body searches, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on Argus Leader: Police use catheters, force to collect urine samples

IA: Def’s search may have violated “plain feel” when drugs removed, but search incident would have occurred shortly

The search of defendant may have violated “plain feel” because the drugs in his pocket obviously weren’t a weapon, it was inevitably discovered because it was the product of a search incident for finding drugs on the car. Stephen v. … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Inevitable discovery | Comments Off on IA: Def’s search may have violated “plain feel” when drugs removed, but search incident would have occurred shortly

SCOTUS: Birchfield v. N.D.: refusing a blood test cannot result in charges

A breath test may be performed incident to an arrest without a warrant. A blood test requires a warrant or exigency. “Motorists may not be criminally punished for refusing to submit to a blood test based on legally implied consent … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, SCOTUS, Search incident, Warrant requirement | Comments Off on SCOTUS: Birchfield v. N.D.: refusing a blood test cannot result in charges

VT: Video recording of def’s telephone conversation with defense counsel required suppression of breath test

Defendant was in the room with the breath testing machine, and his telephone conversation with his lawyer was recorded. Recording was accidental, but defendant correctly believed that it was. This requires suppression of the breath test because his consultation with … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on VT: Video recording of def’s telephone conversation with defense counsel required suppression of breath test

CA3: Direction to ptf to remove pants for observation of UA on supervision was reasonable

Plaintiff was in a urine testing program as a condition of state supervision, and, to prevent cheating, the testing officer directed him to remove his pants so direct observation could be done. Plaintiff characterizes this as a strip search. The … Continue reading →

Posted in Consent, Drug or alcohol testing, Special needs, Strip search | Comments Off on CA3: Direction to ptf to remove pants for observation of UA on supervision was reasonable

D.V.I.: Citizen informant’s tip was corroborated by important details and justified stop

The citizen informant’s tip defendant was the person wanted in a carjacking was alone not enough to make a stop, but here it was corroborated by significant details. “Accordingly, considering the totality of the circumstances in this case, the Court … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Informant hearsay, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on D.V.I.: Citizen informant’s tip was corroborated by important details and justified stop

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)*:

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on TX13: Suspending a DL for refusal of a blood test doesn’t violate the Fourth Amendment

WA: DUI probationer’s condition of random UAs was reasonable

A DUI probationer’s probation condition of random UAs was reasonable “to ensure compliance with a probation condition prohibiting the consumption of alcohol, marijuana, or non-prescribed drugs.” Trial court erred in setting the condition aside. State v. Olsen, 2016 Wash. App. … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Probation / Parole search | Comments Off on WA: DUI probationer’s condition of random UAs was reasonable

TX: Two cases on exigency for warrantless blood draw for DUI

Cole v. State, 2016 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 84 (May 25, 2016) (dissent), found exigency, reversing the court of appeals. Defendant here drove 110 mph down a city street, ran a red light, and the ensuing accident resulted in a … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency | Comments Off on TX: Two cases on exigency for warrantless blood draw for DUI

Two on exigency and DUI blood draws

The record, including medical records from the hospital, support the trial court’s findings that defendant was alert and competent and consented to the blood draw. State’s exigency argument doesn’t need to be addressed. State v. Cooper, 2016-Ohio-3093, 2016 Ohio App. … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on Two on exigency and DUI blood draws

OH9: Taking def’s purse from car as she’s going to jail and searching it justified by auto exception or inventory

When defendant was arrested, the officer took her purse out of the car so it could go to jail with her. The search of the purse was valid as inventory or under the automobile exception. Also, Ohio recognizes good faith … Continue reading →

Posted in Automobile exception, Drug or alcohol testing, Inventory | Comments Off on OH9: Taking def’s purse from car as she’s going to jail and searching it justified by auto exception or inventory

TX14: Dog sniff at apartment door was curtilage and violated Jardines

The use of a drug dog at defendant’s apartment door violated the Fourth Amendment. Defendant’s garage across the road is a different matter, but it doesn’t have to be decided. Officers showed PC for a search of defendant’s garage in … Continue reading →

Posted in Constitutionally protected area, Curtilage, Drug or alcohol testing | Comments Off on TX14: Dog sniff at apartment door was curtilage and violated Jardines

KS: State gets benefit of GFE in DUI cases in a post-McNeely stop but before state supreme court ruled

While McNeely was decided in April 2013 and defendant’s DWI stop was in September 2013, the state supreme court had not held the implied consent statute unconstitutional until later. Therefore, the good faith exception applied. State v. Kraemer, 2016 Kan. … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Emergency / exigency, Good faith exception | Comments Off on KS: State gets benefit of GFE in DUI cases in a post-McNeely stop but before state supreme court ruled

M.D.Fla.: Rule 41(g) proceeding can’t be used to relitigate lost forfeiture

Rule 41(g) on return of property cannot be used to relitigate a final forfeiture order. United States v. Varnedoe, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55933 (M.D.Fla. April 26, 2016). Defendant’s warrantless blood draw was unlawful because defendant was presented with the … Continue reading →

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on M.D.Fla.: Rule 41(g) proceeding can’t be used to relitigate lost forfeiture

AZ: Davis GFE saved McNeely blood draw violation

The state failed to show that defendant consented to his blood draw, but Davis’s good faith exception saves the search here. State v. Valenzuela, 2016 Ariz. LEXIS 116 (April 26, 2016), rev’g 237 Ariz. 307, 350 P.3d 811 (App. 2015):

Posted in Drug or alcohol testing, GPS / Tracking Data | Comments Off on AZ: Davis GFE saved McNeely blood draw violation