Motor Vehicles – OWI — warrantless blood draws

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Criminal

Motor Vehicles – OWI — warrantless blood draws

Where a warrantless blood draw occurred prior to the U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Missouri v. McNeely, the evidence need not be suppressed.

“As was the case in Dearborn, the police officer here was following the ‘clear and settled precedent’ when he obtained a blood draw of Reese without a warrant. The deterrent effect on officer misconduct, which our supreme court characterized as ‘the most important factor’ in determining whether to apply the good faith exception, would, as in Dearborn, be nonexistent in this case because the officer did not and could not have known at the time that he was violating the Fourth Amendment. See id., ¶49. At the time of the blood draw the officer was following clear, well-settled precedent established by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which the court has stated ‘is exactly what officers should do.’ Id., ¶44. Accordingly, because the officer reasonably relied on clear and settled Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent in obtaining the warrantless blood draw and because exclusion in this case would have no deterrent effect, we conclude that the blood draw evidence should not be suppressed.”

Affirmed.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

2012AP2114-CR State v. Reese

Dist. IV, Dodge County, Bissonnette, J., Sherman, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Weininger, Andrew D., Madison; For Respondent: Happ, Susan V., Jefferson; Sanders, Michael C., Madison