Texas Court Holds Blood Draw Violates 4th Amendment

Finally, a Texas court has said enough is enough when it comes to drawing a person's blood in a Texas DWI case.  The 2nd Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court to suppress the blood draw pursuant to a warrant.  The case summary from the 2nd Court of appeals states:

Although some of the trial court’s conclusions of law supporting its suppression of Appellee’s blood test results in this DWI case were erroneous or unnecessary, the trial court did not err in its ultimate conclusion that the manner in which police took Appellee’s blood was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, considering the totality of the circumstances. Here, after obtaining a warrant for Appellee’s blood, which Appellee conceded was valid, a trained officer drew Appellee’s blood in private at the police station (assisted only by the arresting officer) after restraining her to the blood draw chair with gauze, failed to ask for any prior medical history or issues, and failed to check on her condition afterward. Moreover, the police department did not have any guidelines for officers to follow in the event a suspect resisted such a blood draw, which Appellee did here. Although the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Schmerber v. California does not require blood draws to occur at a hospital, it does hold that such a bodily intrusion should be performed in a reasonable manner so as to minimize the risk of infection and pain from the procedure.

The Court said that just because you have a warrant to take a Texas DWI suspect's blood, that is not the end of the inquiry.  Because we have this little document called the United States Constitution, the government must not only have a warrant.  The State of Texas must also execute that blood warrant in a reasonable manner.