On June 27, 2019, the United States Supreme Court (Mitchell v. Wisconsin), held that when a driver is unconscious and being taken to a hospital because of his or her condition, the exigent-circumstances doctrine generally permits a blood draw without a warrant. This means police can “almost always” draw blood without a warrant. However, they must have probable cause to believe an unconscious motorist has committed a drunk driving offense.
The argument pertains to whether the Fourth Amendment is violated when a state “implied consent” law authorizes a blood draw from an unconscious driver. In this case, the answer is no. The state argued that under Wisconsin’s implied-consent law, Mitchell impliedly consented to the test by driving on state roads. That law says any person driving on public roads in Wisconsin “is deemed to have given consent to one or more tests of his or her breath, blood or urine, to determine the presence or quantity in his or her blood or breath, of alcohol . . . .” The law further states a “person who is unconscious or otherwise not capable of withdrawing consent is presumed not to have withdrawn consent under this subsection . . . .”
If you or a friend have been arrested for DUI, please contact us at 316-267-2000 or go to duiwichita.com.