Tests are essential for authorities to be able to determine whether or not you are intoxicated. Field sobriety tests and breathalyzers are often the first line of defense utilized by officers in the battle against drunk driving. The most crucial test however, is the blood test. This is the most invasive, and arguably the most accurate way to determine whether or not an individual is intoxicated, and to what degree they are intoxicated.

Blood tests after traffic stops are serious business. Simply refusing one will earn you significant penalties in almost every state (see our state law page for details on the laws in your state). Increasingly, some states are making it impossible to refuse at all, and will go ahead and take your blood without your consent. A recent case in Illinois has cast light on this practice and could likely change the way roadside blood testing is conducted for years to come.

A Christian County judge has ruled that a blood test conducted during a traffic stop was invalid because the officers failed to secure a warrant. This ruling was based on a 2013 Supreme Court decision (Missouri vs. McNeely) that upheld the claim that a blood test obtained without consent amounted to illegal search and seizure. This sets a new precedent when it comes to prosecuting and defending DUI cases. It also may change the way police handle traffic stops, as any significant delay in obtaining a warrant may allow the alcohol content in the suspects blood to be diluted.

Important developments such as this one could be crucial to applying the best defense you can possibly obtain in a DUI case against you. A FORMER PROSECUTOR is informed and knowledgeable about important changes in the legal system and how best to incorporate them in your defense. Find yours today!