DUI Lawyers Directory. Search for a dui lawyer near you. Operating a vehicle while drinking could cause judicial actions.
 Zip Code Search for DUI Lawyers
Defending Alleged Drunk Driving Criminal Acts Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Read about successful dui defense cases from member dui lawyers Membership at DUI Defenders Discuss issues related to dui/dwi/owi Contact Us about a DUI Lawyer
facebook.com/MyDUI

  to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.

State v. Saich

11/9/2000

ourth Amendment violation when the police obtain a blood sample from an OMVWI arrestee. We specifically rejected the Nelson v. City of Irvine analysis, concluding that we are bound by the supreme court's holding in Bohling. See Thorstad, 2000 WI App 199 at .


. Saich asserts that Bohling is distinguishable because, there, the defendant created his own exigency by refusing to submit to a proffered breath test. He argues that when the supreme court alluded to "the foregoing circumstances" when it set out the four requirements for the taking of warrantless blood samples (see footnote 6), the court was referring to a breath test refusal. See Bohling, 173 Wis. 2d at 533. We disagree. The cited language occurs in the third paragraph of the court's opinion. The only prior reference to the "circumstances" of the case occurs in the first paragraph:


The issue in this case is whether the fact that the percentage of alcohol in a person's blood stream rapidly diminishes after drinking stops alone constitutes a sufficient exigency under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I Section 11 of the Wisconsin Constitution, to justify a warrantless blood draw under the following circumstances: (1) the blood draw is taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer from a person lawfully arrested for a drunk-driving related violation or crime, and (2) there is a clear indication that the blood draw will produce evidence of intoxication. Id. (emphasis added). These circumstances are also present in this case, just as they were in Thorstad, and thus, we affirm the trial court's denial of Saich's motions to suppress.


CONCLUSION


. Because we conclude that the disposition of this appeal is controlled by our holding in State v. Thorstad, we affirm the appealed judgment.


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This opinion will not be published.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.

DUI Driving Defined Highway Defined
Under Influence Defined DUI/3 Strikes DUI & Manslaughter
DUI & Murder DUI Punishment Sobriety Checkpoints
DMV's Role in DUI Revocation vs. Suspension Field Sobriety Testing
Speed Measurement Prior DUI Convictions Drawing Blood & Consent
Refusal to Test DUI Lawyers Testimonials by Member DUI Lawyers
DUI Articles Ignition Interlock Implied Consent
Summary DUI License Suspension In-home Arrest Vehicle Defined
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites  |  Draeger FAQ
SiteMap | DUI Blog | DUI Lawyers | DUI Attorneys | Trading Partners | Member Agreement | Terms of Service
Attorneys Click Here | DUI Case Laws | FAQ | DUI Forum | Directory of DUI Attorneys | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2004. “DUI Defenders”. All rights reserved.