 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
County of Iowa v. Bidwell11/9/2000
nt circumstances" has been overruled in Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385 (1997), and Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927 (1995). Bidwell interprets these cases to mean "exigency isn't determined by the nature of the offense being investigated," but rather by a case-by-case analysis of the totality of the circumstances. We reject Bidwell's argument.
. Contrary to Bidwell's contentions, the County has shown exigency in this case. As we stated in Thorstad, " he Bohling court specifically noted that ... warrantless blood tests [are permitted] because the rapid dissipation of alcohol from the bloodstream constitutes exigent circumstances." Thorstad, 2000 WI App at (citing Bohling, 173 Wis. 2d at 539-40). This also applies in the present case. In any event, Bidwell's reliance on Richards is misplaced. The United States Supreme Court there rejected the "overgeneralization" that, when executing a search warrant in a felony drug investigation, a police officer never needs to knock due to concerns for safety and preservation of evidence. See Richards, 520 U.S. at 387-88, 393. In contrast, we are dealing here with an undisputed statement, recognized by the United States Supreme Court, that alcohol rapidly dissipates from the bloodstream. See Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757, 770 (1966). In sum, exigent circumstances existed, justifying a warrantless search.
CONCLUSION
. Because we conclude that the disposition of this appeal is controlled by our holding in State v. Thorstad, we affirm the appealed order.
By the Court. -- Order 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This opinion will not be published.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.
|
|