CALL 205.538.3340

The Law Office of J.D. Lloyd Logo

AfterTheTrial.com... Because There’s Hope After the Trial

BLOG

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.

 

Background

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.


REVERSED

 

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.

 

OTHER OPINIONS

 

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


Tags

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

Archive

DISCLAIMER

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.