Should the Law Require a Search Warrant to Draw Blood in DUI Cases?
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case from the state of Missouri, which could have implications on a national level. In Georgia, a search warrant is required.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case from Missouri on whether police must first get a search warrant before forcing a suspected drunk driver to have blood drawn.
According to a story in The San Francisco Chronicle, the justices have agreed to hear the Missouri contention that the Constitution does not require police to take the time to get a search warrant in order to draw blood. The contention is that the alcohol would dissipate in the system during the wait. The high court in Missouri, however, disagrees and claims a search warrant is required.
There are 27 states, including Georgia, that already require a search warrant to draw blood. It is reported that more than 1.4 million people are arrested in the US each year and charged with driving under the influence.
Do you think that members of law enforcement should be required to obtain a warrant before forcing a suspected drunk driver to have blood drawn in DUI cases?