a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2019 Dayton DUI.
All Rights Reserved.

9:00 - 17:00

Our Opening Hours Mon. - Fri.

Facebook

Twitter

Search
OVI Menu
 

missouri v. mcneely Tag

Dayton DUI Attorney Charles Rowland > Posts tagged "missouri v. mcneely"

Supreme Court To Decide DUI Cases

In a follow-up to its recent decision in Missouri v. McNeely, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether a blood or breath test for drunk driving can be made without a search warrant and whether, if there is no warrant, an individual can be charged with a crime for refusing to take such a test.As in Ohio, North Dakota, state laws bars a person from driving in the state if he or she refuses to submit to a chemical test, of blood, breath or urine, to determine alcohol concentration. It makes refusal to take such a test open to prosecution...

Continue reading

DUI Law: What Did SCOTUS Say In Missouri v. McNeely

If you have been following developments in DUI law, you have no doubt heard about the United States Supreme Court decision in Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S.Ct. 1552 (2013).  The case deals with when, and under what circumstances the government is required to seek a warrant prior to drawing blood from a suspected DUI offender. Below is a quote from the case which provides a reasonable (and short) analysis of the case.  If you want to read the full opinion please click on the case name above. In Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966), this Court upheld...

Continue reading

The Future of Forced Blood Draws (Missouri v. McNeely)

In what can only be seen as an overwhelming victory for the 4th Amendment, this week the United States Supreme Court decided Missouri v. McNeely which involved the issue of whether or not law enforcement can force a blood draw following a drunk driving arrest without following the warrant requirements of the 4th amendment.  In the ruling the Court sided with the defendant who had been subjected to a blood test without a warrant.  The warrantless blood draw revealed him to be nearly twice the legal limit.  Justice Sotomayor, writing for the majority held that forced extraction of a person’s blood...

Continue reading