 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
City of Fountain City v. Wilson5/2/2000
direction of a law enforcement officer. See id. at 533-34. The court explained that a warrantless blood draw is permissible when:
(1) the blood draw is taken to obtain evidence of intoxication from a person lawfully arrested for a drunk-driving related violation or crime,
(2) there is a clear indication that the blood draw will produce evidence of intoxication, (3) the method used to take the blood sample is a reasonable one and performed in a reasonable manner, and (4) the arrestee presents no reasonable objection to the blood draw. Id. (footnote omitted).
Wilson disputes only the last two conditions. He contends that (1) the manner in which the blood sample was taken "was not a reasonable one" because alternative tests were available, and (2) he presented a "reasonable objection" based on his fear of needles.
1. Reasonableness of Blood Draw
. In State v. Krause, 168 Wis. 2d 578, 589, 484 N.W.2d 347 (Ct. App. 1992), this court enumerated various factors to consider in determining whether blood is drawn in a reasonable manner. Claiming that the blood draw was unreasonable here, Wilson focuses on two of those factors: (1) that he made a reasonable request for an alternate test, and (2) that an alternative test was available.
. Since Krause, our supreme court in Bohling held that a warrantless blood draw is permissible "at the direction of a law enforcement officer." Id. at 533. The court used this language despite Bohling's earlier refusal to take a breath test. In any event, Wisconsin's implied consent law allows a law enforcement agency to designate which test will be administered first. See Wis. Stat. § 343.305(2). The availability of alternate tests is not a factor that a police officer must consider in deciding whether to draw blood.
2. Reasonable Objection
. Wilson fails to explain how his claimed fear of needles constitutes a reasonable objection. He does not claim that he has any medical or religious basis for his fear or objection. His bald assertion is not objectively reasonable. If this court concluded that Wilson's objection was reasonable, there would be no standard for reasonable objections.
By the Court. -- Order reversed and cause remanded for further proceedings.
This opinion will not be published.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.
|
|