Carey Law Firm, llc - DWI and Criminal Defense
RSS Follow Become a Fan

Delivered by FeedBurner


McNeely in Minnesota
Minnesota Crime Statistics
Minnesota DWI Blood Testing
Minnesota DWI Conviction and Entry into Canada
Minnesota DWI Court Opinions
Minnesota DWI Enhancement
Minnesota DWI Forfeiture
Minnesota DWI News
Minnesota DWI Statistics
Minnesota DWI Take or Refuse Testing
Minnesota DWI Test Refusal
Minnesota DWI Testing Decision
Minnesota DWI Urine Testing
Minnesota Felony DWI
Minnesota Ignition Interlock
Minnesota Immigration and DWI
Minnesota Implied Consent Advisory
Minnesota Implied Consent License Revocation
Minnesota Intoxilyzer Source Code Litigation
Minnesota Police Surveillance
Minnesota Right to Counsel in DWI Case
Minnesota Whiskey Plates
powered by

Minneapolis DWI Attorney Blog

McNeely and the Constitutionality of Minnesota's DWI Laws

On April 17, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Missouri v. McNeely, holding that a nonconsensual, warrantless blood test in a DWI case violated the defendant's right to be free from an unreasonable search under the Fourth Amendment. The Court ruled that a warrant was required to obtain a sample of the defendant's blood for alcohol testing. Consequently, the blood test was excluded as evidence in the case.

McNeely is a seminal case in the area of DWI law. Prior to McNeely, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a warrant never is required to obtain a sample of a driver's blood, breath, or urine in a DWI case because the single-factor exigency of alcohol dissipation creates an exception to the warrant requirement. McNeely, however, rejected single-factor exigency and effectively overruled Minnesota's prior jurisprudence in this area. 

As a result, defense lawyers are challenging the constitutionality of Minnesota's DWI laws. Already, a few district court judges have ruled that Minnesota's DWI laws are unconstitutional in routine DWI cases. Ultimately, the issue will be decided by the Minnesota Supreme Court in the coming months.

Stay tuned.

1 Comment to McNeely and the Constitutionality of Minnesota's DWI Laws:

Comments RSS
Russell Thomas on Friday, August 09, 2013 1:49 AM
That seems to be a big problem. Blood, breathe or urine test is a must for a DUI/DWI. So why there is a question on warrant. That's typical. Process may delay if warrant is required and if the warrant is not required then cops will do what they want. I think warrant is a must so the process goes smoothly.
Reply to comment

Add a Comment

Your Name:
Email Address: (Required)
Make your text bigger, bold, italic and more with HTML tags. We'll show you how.
Post Comment