 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
[T] State v. Medina-Fuentes5/8/2003
analyzing the totality of the circumstances." Id. "The test is objective: what a reasonable police officer would reasonably believe under the circumstances ...." Id. (citations omitted). "Probable cause does not mean more likely than not." Id. The information need only "support a reasonable belief that guilt is more than a possibility." Id.
. At the suppression hearing, Officer Rahaman testified about the circumstances surrounding the blood draw. He testified that he has extensive experience as a police officer, which includes training in detecting intoxicated drivers. He testified that, at their first contact, there was a strong odor of intoxicants coming from Medina-Fuentes. Rahaman also testified that the Med-Flight doctor told him he smelled an odor of intoxicants on Medina-Fuentes. Rahaman testified that Medina-Fuentes had red, bloodshot, and watery eyes. Finally, Rahaman testified that he was aware that Medina-Fuentes was involved in a head-on collision that had killed one of the drivers, suggesting erratic driving by at least one of the two drivers, and that the collision occurred at approximately 1:00 a.m., a time during which the majority of intoxicated drivers are arrested. Considering all of these facts, we conclude that Rahaman reasonably concluded that there was "a fair probability that contraband or evidence of a crime" would be found in the blood of Medina-Fuentes. Therefore, there was probable cause to conduct the search.
. Next, we address whether exigent circumstances existed to excuse application for a judicially authorized warrant. The supreme court has ruled that "the rapid dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream alone constitutes a sufficient exigency for a warrantless blood draw to obtain evidence of intoxication ...." Bohling, 173 Wis. 2d at 539. Because there was both probable cause to search and exigent circumstances, the evidence was admissible.
. The parties argue at length about the application of a number of cases to this dispute, including Swanson, 164 Wis. 2d 437, and Seibel, 163 Wis. 2d 164. Because we have concluded that the evidence was admissible under the probable cause to search\exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement, we do not need to address whether there was probable cause to arrest Medina-Fuentes at the time the blood was drawn.
By the Court. -- Order reversed.
This opinion will not be published. Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5 (2001-02).
Page 1 2 Wisconsin DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|