Quantcast
Don't Miss
Home / MinnLawyer Blog / Supreme Court says where driver consents, no warrant is needed.
Court rejects argument that implied consent law is unconstitutional

Supreme Court says where driver consents, no warrant is needed.

The Supreme Court has agreed with the state in State v. Brooks and said that where a driver consents to a “search,” i.e. a blood alcohol test, the state need not have a warrant.  The court applied a “totality of the circumstances” test to determine that the driver explicitly consented.

Defense attorneys say the decision is not a win for the state.  The Supreme Court said that DWI cases are subject to the Fourth Amendment like any other case and DWIs are not “special” when it comes to the defendant’s constitutional rights.

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman has not yet weighed in with Minnesota Lawyer.  We’ll post here when he does.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Scroll To Top