CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo Because There’s Hope After the Trial


After The Trial Blog

The After The Trial blog presents insights on ongoing and recent trials around the state of Alabama, including weekly criminal law round-ups.

US Supreme Court Update - Birchfield v. ND

J.D. Lloyd - Friday, June 24, 2016

Birchfield v. North Dakota

Bernard v. North Dakota

Beylund v. North Dakota


Summary: During a DUI stop, the Fourth Amendment allows police officers to administer a warrantless breath test as a search incident to arrest, but does not allow for warrantless blood tests as a search incident to arrest. As such, because a warrantless blood draw as a search incident to arrest is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment, the State cannot criminalize the refusal to submit to warrantless blood draws as search incident to arrest under implied consent laws.



Every state has some form of “implied consent” law to help law enforcement investigate whether a driver is driving drunk. An “implied consent”  requires a driver to submit to blood-alcohol content (BAC) testing. If you refuse, you could be subject to administrative penalties. In Alabama, you could have your license suspended or be forced to install an Interlock device that tests your breath for alcohol when you start your car.


North Dakota’s implied consent law took things a step further: if you refused to submit to breath or blood testing, you could be prosecuted criminally. At the heart of these DUI cases are three questions: (1) Can police force you to submit to a warrantless breath test as a search incident to a DUI arrest? (2) Can police force you to submit to a warrantless blood draw as a search incident to a DUI arrest? (3) Can a state criminalize the refusal of either under its implied consent law?


Birchfield was convicted after refusing to submit to a warrantless blood test. Birchfield argued that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Amendment and that the Fourth Amendment prohibited criminalizing his refusal. Bernard was prosecuted for refusing to submit to a warrantless breath test and appealed the constitutionality of the search and criminal prosecution for refusing the breath test. Beylund consented to the blood draw after police told him he had to submit. Beylund appealed the voluntariness of his consent to the draw and the ND Supreme Court affirmed.



The Fourth Amendment allows police officers to conduct warrantless searches as incident to a lawful arrest. In the context of a DUI, the Court concluded that law enforcement may order you to submit to a breath test to check BAC as a lawful warrantless search incident to arrest. In the Court’s view, a breath test does not “implicate significant privacy concerns;” however, a blood test does implicate “significant privacy concerns” as it is obviously more intrusive to a suspect’s body. Because of the greater privacy concern and because breath testing is a less-intrusive alternative to check BAC, police cannot conduct a warrantless blood draw as a search incident to arrest. The Court left open the possibility that other warrant exceptions could apply.


The Court then applied this holding to the three cases at hand. For Birchfield, the Court said a warrantless draw of Birchfield’s blood would be unconstitutional, so he could not be prosecuted for refusing an unconstitutional search. For Bernard, the Court concluded that the police did not have to get a warrant to force him to submit to a breath test, so the warrantless search was proper under the Fourth Amendment, and thus, his prosecution was constitutional. For Beylund, the Court remanded the case back to the ND SC to determine whether his consent to the blood draw was voluntary given the inaccuracy of the police officer’s instruction.




Justices Sotomayor and Ginsburg would have held that the Fourth Amendment prohibits both breath tests and blood draws as searches incident to lawful arrest. Justice Thomas, on the other hand, would have held that the Fourth Amendment allows both breath tests and blood draws as searches incident to lawful arrest.



If you or someone you know has been convicted of wrongful criminal charges, there is hope after the trial. Contact us today by clicking HERE.


Recent Posts


apprendi v new jersey negligent homicide CCA update florence alabama boaz alabama state of arizona bessemer alabama bernard v north dakota implied consent marion county West Alabama capital murder felony assaults Joshua Reese south carolina abuse burglary Jefferson County Alabama mountain brook alabama self defense kidnapping Sardis Alabama habeas corpus relief robberies judicial override Neil Gorsuch dothan alabama brookside alabama towles v state Malone v State rainbow city alabama campbell v state sentencing law and policy blog summaries Dylann Roof social media cherokee county alabama shooting death theft Alabaster alabama Tracie Todd Xavier Beasley albertville alabama home repair fraud scotus identity theft executions sixth amendment texas Etowah County Alabama, domestic violence drug activity aziz sayyed road rage dekalb county alabama alabama supreme court baldwin county alabama Ingmire v State Eutaw Alabama forced isolation gadsden alabama lamar county car accident betton v state christmas shooting Hillary Clinton, murder criminal justice church robberies the mannequin challenge Easter underage drinking birmingham alabama drug possession, aiding and abetting theft of property oneonta alabama Alonzo Ephraim economic growth hanceville alabama Rule 32 street racing LWOP Adamsville alabama kenneth eugene billups montgomery alabama embezzlement Pleasant Grove Alabama jerry bohannon illegal gun carry Samuel Alito Kay Ivey public assistance fraud constitutional law, alabama shelby county strickland v washington kimberly alabama Shonda Walker, drug seizure hurst mandamus court systems, terell corey mcmullin warrior alabama fultondale alabama homicide rate lethal injection abduction fort payne alabama hoover alabama limestone county alabama fake kidnapping, blount county alabama banville v state drug trafficking, court of criminal appeals Thomas Hardiman russell calhoun arson Lucky D Arcade drug crimes alabama law enforcement agency ake v oklahoma serial heritage christian university cullman alabama pruitt v state state of alabama nathan woods brendan dassey animal cruelty gun rights criminal mischief john earle redfearn IV v state st clair county alabama mobile alabama mulga alabama benjamin todd acton sheffield v state netflix birchfield v north dakota Guy Terrell Junior gun control trussville alabama clarence thomas npr armed robbery huntsville moore v texas 2016 election, abandonment § 13A-3-23 utah supreme court beylund v north dakota death penalty maryland court of special appeals mcwilliams v dunn William Pryor Glaze v State 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Briarwood Presbyterian Church morgan county alabama eric sterling bailey v us utah v strieff warrantless blood draws ring v arizona capital punishment adnan syed, New York Times keith v state moving violations greene county alabama Woods v State lethal injection drugs heflin alabama bomb threat pell city alabama drug busts tarrant alabama fraudulent checks talladega superspeedway constitutional violations capital offenses Justice Sotomayor Tommy Arthur brady v maryland blountsville alabama operation crackdown madison alabama ex parte briseno minor offenses brendan dassey, steve avery, making a murderer, scotus, netflix tuscaloosa alabama alabama criminal law roundup domestic abuse Stephen Breyer Benn v State mount olive alabama editorial Gardendale Alabama shooting OJ Simpson Made in America debtor prison ferguson missouri sarah koenig smith v state OJ Simpson huntsville alabama christian guitierez Donald Trump, nicholas hawkins department of justice decatur alabama assault fraud court of criminal appeal releases alfonso morris steve avery asia mcclain Kareem Dacar Gaymon shoplifting brian fredick lucas attempted murder calhoun county alabama peyton pruitt Mike Hubbard hoax destructive devices breaking and entering eleventh circuit ruling second amendment edwards v arizona springville alabama levins v state foley alabama eighth amendment, Marengo County Alabama fairfield alabama, pinson alabama Fentanyl parole illegal gambling SCOTUS, criminal justice reform, mccalla alabama pelham alabama operation bullseye drug smuggling mike gilotti avondale alabama fourth amendment unlawful manufacturing § 13A-3-23(d) immunity hearing debit card skimming scams sexual assault crime of passion death penalty, stanley brent chapman battles v state prostitution sting adger alabama baltimore city circuit court eugene lee jones v state morris alabama legende v state midazolam US Supreme Court Update concealed carry hurst v florida anniston alabama, Wesley Adam Whitworth homicide narcotics investigation stoves v state lauderdale county alabama endangerment of a child making a murderer hall v florida department of justice, Walker County Alabama dora alabama



These recoveries and testimonials are not an indication of future results. Every case is different, and regardless of what friends, family, or other individuals may say about what a case is worth, each case must be evaluated on its own facts and circumstances as they apply to the law. The valuation of a case depends on the facts, the injuries, the jurisdiction, the venue, the witnesses, the parties, and the testimony, among  other factors. Furthermore, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Get Free Legal Advice  Contact us for a complimentary legal consultation

I am interested in scheduling a free legal consultation and receiving additional information.

Submitting Form...

The server encountered an error.

Thank you, your  entry has been  received.

© 2017 The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd, LLC. All Rights Reserved. |


As required by Rule 7.2(e), Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, no representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.