According to the United State’s Supreme Court, the answer is “heck yeah.” On April 22nd, 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Navarette et. Al. v. California. A case where police initiated a traffic stop based on an anonymous 911 tip that a vehicle had recently run them off the road. Do police have to verify …
On Friday April 11, 2014 the South Carolina Senate passed Bill S.137 known as “Emma’s Law” which now will be sent to Gov. Nikki Haley who will almost certainly sign it into law. South Carolina DUI laws have changed since October 1, 2014. The newly signed Emma’s law is now in effect for persons convicted …
DUI Breath Test “Blow Hard” Instruction Improper On January 23, 2013 a SC judge ruled that the instruction to “blow hard” when administering a DUI breath test invalidated the results and ruled it inadmissible in court. The court noted that “There is simply no way to avoid the unavoidable conclusion that instructing a subject to …
“Blow hard” instruction in DUI Breath Test Improper. Read More »
On January 9th, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Missouri v. McNeely on whether police may obtain a nonconsensual and warrantless blood sample from a drunk driver under the exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement based upon the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream. Facts Missouri police initiated a traffic stop …
U.S. Supreme Court Hears DUI Warrantless Blood Draw Case Read More »
On April 17, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court in Missouri v. McNeely answered the question of whether police can obtain a nonconsensual warrantless blood sample from a person accused of DUI. The answer is Yes, police will have to get a warrant first (most times). The court held “that in drunk-driving investigations, the natural dissipation of alcohol in …
