Are DWI suspects' rights being violated by new mandatory blood law?
September 1st of every odd year many new laws go into effect in Texas.
This is because our legislature meets every odd year and many laws passed by the session start of September 1st of that year. In 2009, the legislature passed a law that allows for a "mandatory" blood test of any one suspected of driving while intoxicated (PDF) IF certain conditions are met. One of the requirements is that the arresting officer have "a reasonable belief" that the suspect has two prior DWI convictions.
Senate Bill 328 allows authorities to draw blood without warrants for the following additional offenses: driving while intoxicated-3rd offense; driving while intoxicated with a child passenger; driving while intoxicated, where the officer 'reasonably believes an individual other than the suspect suffered bodily injury and was transported to a hospital or similar facility'; driving while intoxicated with a previous conviction of DWI with a child passenger, intoxication assault or intoxication manslaughter.
I'm intrigued to see how law enforcement attempts to use the law. Specifically, I'm curious:
- How far can an officer go in his reasonable belief?
- What if the officer is wrong?
- What if the prior case against a citizen accused was dismissed or rejected?
- What if there was a finding of not guilty by a court or jury?
I believe this law is unconstitutional and overreaching by the government. But what else is new these days. The government wants to take away many rights. The bigger question here is what will happen to this law, will it be upheld? I have my ideas, but as they say, time will tell.
