I was out of town last week when the Times-Union ran a story about a Jacksonville DUI ruling with huge implications for everyone in the community. I almost fell off the sofa Sunday afternoon when I saw the headline.
Florida law outlines very limited circumstances in which the police are allowed to force a suspected drunk driver to give a blood sample for testing of the driver’s blood alcohol content. Basically, unless you’re involved in an accident that causes a death or a serious bodily injury, the law doesn’t give the police the authority to take your blood.
But the State Attorney’s Office, in my opinion, did some legal gymnastics in an effort to circumvent the Florida statutes. In accident cases not involving death or serious bodily injury, the police started seeking search warrants, arguing that a suspected drunk driver’s blood is property that can be seized upon a showing of probable cause. Some local judges were signing off on these warrants, allowing forced blood draws.
Defense attorneys, of course, contested this practice. Finally, Jacksonville attorney Scott Mitchell brought a test case. The trial court judge agreed with Scott that this new practice did not comply with Florida law. The State appealed, and the case went before a three-judge panel of circuit court judges. Two out of the three judges ruled against Scott’s client, but I don’t think the case will end there. We can look forward to another appellate round.
The Florida legislature was very specific in writing the DUI statute. If the public wants the law changed, then legislators should respond by amending the statute. Unless and until that happens, the police should follow the law just like they expect drivers to do.
Sullivan & Hepler 