 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hanson2/27/2002
der the Fourth Amendment when the suspect has expressed a fear of needles and asked for a breath test rather than a blood draw. Hanson cannot make that argument under the facts of this case.
. As to her challenge to the warrantless testing of her blood sample, Hanson acknowledges this court's recent holding in State v. VanLaarhoven, 2001 WI App 275, , 248 Wis. 2d 881, 637 N.W.2d 411, that a warrant is not required for the testing of evidence otherwise lawfully seized. Hanson argues that VanLaarhoven is not satisfied because her blood sample was not lawfully seized in the first instance because of the unconstitutionality of the implied consent law. But, as we have noted, Thorstad says otherwise.
. We reject Hanson's constitutional challenges. We affirm the judgment of conviction.
By the Court. -- Judgment affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)4.
Page 1 2 Wisconsin DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|