ROBIN VERA COLBERT v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Special Appeals, Friedman, July 28, 2016,
DUI – Breath Test – TR 16-205.1 is a constitutional per se rule approved under the USSC opinion in McNeely allowing warrantless blood tests in certain fatal crashes
Continue reading
DANNY BIRCHFIELD v. NORTH DAKOTA
WILLIAM ROBERT BERNARD, JR. v. MINNESOTA
STEVE MICHAEL BEYLUND v. GRANT LEVI, DIRECTOR, NORTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Supreme Court of the United States, Alito, June 23, 2016,
DUI/DWI – The States may not criminalize refusal to take a warrantless blood test, but there is no right to refuse a breath test incident to a DUI/DWI arrest.
(Concur and Dissent – Sotomayor with Ginsburg – officers should have to obtain a warrant for both breath and blood tests)
(Concur and Dissent – Thomas – officers should not have to obtain a warrant for either breath or blood tests due to exigency)
EFRAIN TAYLOR v. STATE OF MARYLAND
Court of Appeals, Wilner, May 23, 2016,
Warrantless Search – Vehicle Search – Gant – The “reasonable to believe” standard set forth in Gant is the equivalent of “reasonable articulable suspicion.”
MOTOR VEHICLE ADMINISTRATION v. SUNDAR SEENATH
Court of Appeals, Watts, May 23, 2016,
DUI – Implied Consent – Penalty after being read DR-015 Advice of Rights form does not violate due process even where it does not inform a driver of every possible enticement for taking an alcohol concentration test
(Dissent – Hotten – Plain language of DR-015 leads “a driver to believe that his or her commercial driving privileges would be unaffected by the failure of an alcohol concentration test.”)