Blood Alcohol Test

In 2013 the U.S. Supreme court ruled in an important case that the police could not 'force' a motorist to take a blood or breath test without first obtaining a warrant from a judge. ( Missouri v. McNeely ) After that decision, many states including California changed their arrest procedure making a judge available 24/ 7 telephonically  to issue warrants for blood tests. However, it was still a crime in most states to refuse to voluntarily agree to take a test. So the question was, shouldn't a driver have the right to refuse a 'search and seizure' of his blood and force the police to obtain a warrant ? Especially since many times the officer didn't want the headache of getting a warrant to respect the driver's constitutional rights, and instead choose to charge the more serious 'test refusal'. Now the U.S. Supreme court will weigh in once again on the issue and has decided to hear oral argument on three cases that present that issue. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/12/11/supreme-court-drunk-driving-blood-alcohol-tests/77165668/

"Wet Reckless"

California DUI License Issues