DWI ADVICE

[Guest042413]

They forced me to give blood and had no warrant and they told me to do my abc's backwards hell I cant even do that normal lol so I dont know

[Ranchhand]

I believe the laws against DWI are there for a purpose. There is no argument that drinking impairs your judgement. Not to hijack the thread, but I personally know someone that was killed by a drunk driver. I drink sometimes, but never drive while drinking. I have no sympathy for those that do. Ranch

[Jaci]

I second that my cousin was 26 and killed by a drunk driver 2yrs ago!!! I have no sympathy what so ever on anyone who gets a DUI its to easy to not to drink and drive................

PEACE,Jaci

[Woodduck82]

Olivia, they didn't force you to give blood unless they had a warrant.

This is hilarious btw : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW0UhYfs1es

[mirandalee]

not true my second dwi i had to tke ablood test. You could refuse the breath test. The only tim te police need a warent is to search your car, or home. Getting my degee for Criminal Justice I have learned a whole lot...

[SARR]

Originally Posted by mirandalee

not true my second dwi i had to tke ablood test. You could refuse the breath test. The only tim te police need a warent is to search your car, or home. Getting my degee for Criminal Justice I have learned a whole lot...

Sorry, that's incorrect. The DA in San Antonio has been chatting this issue up for a while. If you refuse to consent for the FST or breathalyzer in SA, the arresting officer hauls you in, goes down the hall to the Magistrate Judge's office and gets them to sign a warrant to obtain the blood.
You either consented to the blood draw or it was obtained with a warrant. If no warrant was obtained and you didn't consent, it would seem that would be assault.

[Guest042413]

they never got a warrant and I was forced as soon as I was arrested the took me to the hospital

[Woodduck82]

Yeah, Olivia.... even your lawyer will tell you that you didn't have to give it. A judge has to sign a warrant to obtain a blood sample. That is what the big deal is about during the no refusal weekends. In Brazoria, Galveston and Harris county, they have a mobile judge with an EMT to draw blood on site when not giving consent for a FST and breath test. Trust me ladies, I'm going through mine right now.... have been for 5 months now. 15k later and a lot of learning and advice from my lawyer. The ONLY time you are required to do anything like that, is if a judge signs a warrant for it. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure your 4th, 8th and 14 amendments were violated.

[cckid2006]

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

While I believe taking my blood is cruel, I don't think the court does. Did you mean the 5th?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[ElisabethWhispers]

Originally Posted by oLiViA88

They forced me to give blood and had no warrant and they told me to do my abc's backwards hell I cant even do that normal lol so I dont know

I've been stopped a few times for this although I was never charged. (Elisabeth is wiping her brow on that one!)

Someone told me later, I don't remember who it was, that asking that is to see how you respond with the request. I remember saying something along the lines of that I had a Bachelor's in English and that I didn't think that I could do it.

And then I tried. After about four letters, they said o.k. The same thing with asking me to, when they started the time, tell me when 60 seconds was up. I mean, jeez. How can you do that?

At any rate, I've been asked to do some stupid stuff when I've been stopped. Twice. But thankfully, I was never taken in.

So I don't agree with the one person above who said if they ask you to do a few things, walk a straight line, etc., that they're already planning on arresting you.

It didn't happen to me. But as I said above, "But for the grace of God" ... and all that.

I get the shivers just remembering it!

Elisabeth

[Woodduck82]

Yeah I might be confused on the eigth amendment, perhaps it was the fifth.

[ShysterJon]

Originally Posted by SARR

You either consented to the blood draw or it was obtained with a warrant. If no warrant was obtained and you didn't consent, it would seem that would be assault.

That's all correct. A suspect whose blood is drawn without a warrant might have a civil rights action against the state agents who took the sample. Further, if the blood test showed a blood-alcohol level exceeding the legal limit, the evidence may be excluded from trial.

But before a person runs to the courthouse to sue the police, they might want to confirm there wasn't a warrant. No offense to someone arrested for DWI, but it's very likely you're probably not 100% clear on all that transpired while you and Barney Fife were mingling. And hey, you may even have been drinking before you were stopped. (For example, I can't tell you the number of times there's been a wide disparity between a DWI client's recitation of events and what was depicted in the case video recording.)

(btw, this is one of those threads that proves a little knowledge of the law can be a dangerous thing.)

A question I've brought up before is: What if the cops get a warrant to take a blood sample, the suspect refuses to cooperate and physically resists allowing the med tech (or whomever is assigned the task of taking the sample) to take the sample, but they restrain the suspect and take the sample anyway?

There's a case from the highest state criminal court in Texas on this issue:

Attachment 96828

The court held that the police may restrain a resisting suspect and forcibly take a blood sample. The case is an interesting read on the issue. It all boils down to whether the procedures used in taking the blood sample follow Fourth Amendment standards of "reasonableness."

However, even under the holding in Johnston, a suspect MAY be able to convince the police not to take a blood sample, or may get the sample excluded from evidence, if they can show a specialized concern, such as "fear, concern for health, or religious scruple" or a "specific medical condition that may create an unjustified risk, trauma, or pain." Examples I can think of include expressing a heightened fear of infection from giving blood because of a serious medical condition, or stating that one is a member of a religion that prohibits undergoing a blood test.

I don't know of a case in Texas about this, but it intrigues me. I'd appreciate it very much if one of you would test my theory the next time you're detained for suspicion of DWI and are presented with a warrant to give blood.

[Woodduck82]

Not me man, this last one... being my first, will be my last. The above document does trouble me though.

[MrKlean]

What if a person is on a blood thinner like Coumadin? That would mean that the person would have increased bleeding after the puncture. Would that qualify as a reason to not draw blood?

[Woodduck82]

No, that is why a qualified medical person should be drawing the blood. Or the "certified" officer should ask you certain medical questions.