42°F
Sponsored by

South Dakota Supreme Court Rules DUI Implied Consent Law Unconstitutional

Law enforcement will no longer be able to draw a blood sample from a suspected drunk driver unless the driver give consent.
Pierre, SD (ABC9 News) - Law enforcement will no longer be able to draw a blood sample from a suspected drunk driver unless the driver give consent.

The DUI implied consent law, which was passed in 2006, state that anyone who operates a vehicle in the state automatically gives consent for to have their blood drawn and tested to determine the amount of alcohol in the person's blood.

Now the South Dakota Supreme Court is reversing that law, following the footsteps of a recent U.S. Supreme Court Case out of Missouri that claimed it was unconstitutional to draw blood without a warrant.

The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that the implied consent law violates the constitution, adding that the "reasonableness of a search depends on balancing the public’s interest in preventing crime with the individual’s right to be free from arbitrary and unwarranted governmental intrusions into persona privacy."

In addition the Court emphasized, "In determining the reasonableness of the warrantless blood draw based on exigent circumstances, a court must consider all of the facts and circumstances of a particular case and base its holding on those facts."




Page: [[$index + 1]]