Articles Posted in DUI Test Refusal

A Michigan implied consent hearing is an informal hearing where the officer that arrested you for drunk driving provides testimony to prove that you unreasonably refused a breath blood or urine test. Before we move on with a further discussion of the hearing, let’s review the concept of implied consent, and how it applies in a Michigan drunk driving case.

The Legal Fiction of Implied Consent

Both the Michigan and the United States Constitutions provide that the police can’t search you, your home or your car without a warrant. Thus, before the police may proceed with a search of your breath, blood or urine, they must first obtain a warrant. However, there are many exceptions to this warrant requirement and consent is one of them.  This is where the legal fiction of implied consent comes into play.

Defending Drinking Drivers, written by DUI defense attorney Patrick Barone

2024 Edition – Defending Drinking Drivers

The Barone Defense Firm is pleased to announce that the 2024 Edition of Patrick Barone’s Defending Drinking Drivers is now available from the publisher, Amazon, and wherever fine books are sold. Known as “revision 40,” the current Edition contains many new sections and model defense motions.

Regarding the defense of a DUI with a blood test, the 2024 update contains sample cross-examination of the doctor, nurse, technician, or phlebotomist. This model cross-examination includes sample questions relative to contamination and suggestions for how to approach and perhaps discredit the credibility of this important but often overlooked pr0secution witness. In Chapter Six, Trial, Mr. Barone sets forth a new way of approaching voir dire, and the 2024 update also contains a sample motion requesting attorney-conducted voir dire. Additionally, in his revision of Chapter 6, Mr. Barone provides a unique and compelling explanation for why seating arrangements are an important element of trial and why the court should consider allowing the defendant to sit next to the jury rather than always cede this seat to the prosecutor by default. A sample motion for requesting that the defendant be provided with the “best” seat is also included in this 2024 update.

Driving under the influence (DUI), or in Michigan Operating While Intoxicated (OWI), is usually charged using a breath test result. However, due to the recently discovered breath testing fraud, more often Michigan DUI cases are charged using a blood test result.  Breath test results are available immediately after the test is administered at the police station or jail. Blood sample results, however, can take weeks or months to be returned from the Michigan State Police (MSP) forensics lab. The prosecutor in a DUI case generally, but not always, waits for blood results to submit formal charges because if the result is over .08 then the case can be charged under Michigan’s Unlawful Blood Alcohol Level law.  And if the test result is above a .17, then it is considered a super-drunk driving.

What is the Process That My Blood Sample Goes Through?

If you have gone through a Michigan DUI arrest that involved a blood sample, you may have noticed that the police officer provided special vials to be used for the sample. These blood collection vials come from a kit that is specifically made for police agencies in Michigan to collect blood samples for criminal investigations. There should be two vials with grey caps. Sodium fluoride should be in the vials to properly preserve the blood. The vials are sent to the Michigan State Police forensics lab in Lansing for testing. Once tested, the results are sent back to the arresting agency, and the prosecutor for that agency.  The prosecutor will review the matter, and if appropriate, will file DUI charges against you in court. If the blood is being tested for alcohol only, the process usually takes three to six weeks. If it’s also being tested for drugs, it could take months. During the coronavirus pandemic, the results could take even longer to be returned.

Supreme Court to Rule: Can Unconscious Driver Consent to Blood Draw?

On January 11th the United States Supreme Court indicated that they would hear a case arising out of the state of Wisconsin involving the constitutionality of a warrantless blood draw from an unconscious person. The name of the case is Mitchell v. Wisconsin and the State Court’s opinion is found at State v. Mitchell, 383 Wis.2d 192, 914 N.W.2d 151, 2018 WI 84 (Sup. Ct. Wisc., 2018).  This state court opinion contains the following facts and analysis; first, the defendant drank to the point of passing out, meaning he was voluntarily rendered unconscious. A roadside breath test suggested that the defendant had a breath alcohol concentration of 0.24.  The blood test came back slightly lower at 0.222. After the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the warrantless blood test, the defendant asked the United States Supreme Court (USSC) to hear the case.

In analyzing if the warrantless blood draw from the unconscious person was constitutionally permissible, the Wisconsin Supreme Court reviewed both prior USSC cases of McNeely and Birchfield and focused on the provisions of the state’s implied consent law. The state court found that the search was permissible because the defendant’s self-induced physical condition did not render Wisconsin’s Implied Consent presumption unreasonable under the totality of circumstances.  This was based on four factors: (1) by exercising the privilege of driving on Wisconsin highways, the defendant’s conduct demonstrated consent to provide breath, blood or urine samples if law enforcement had probable cause to believe that he had operated his vehicle while intoxicated, (2) the arresting officer had probable cause to arrest the defendant for driving while intoxicated, (3) the defendant  chose to drink sufficient alcohol to produce unconsciousness, and; (4) by his conduct, the defendant forfeited the statutory opportunity to assert that he had “withdrawn consent” he previously gave. This opinion suggests that had the driver, prior to becoming unconscious, manifested any intent to withdraw his consent, then the outcome would have been different.

By deciding to hear the case, the USSC has signaled their intention to rule on the constitutionality of the Wisconsin decision/law. This is interesting because there is a split of authority on this issue at the State Court level. In fact, Wisconsin is among 29 states that allow warrantless blood draws from persons who are unconscious.  The remaining states have either not ruled on the issue, or do not allow them.

Can I Refuse Police Officer DUI/OWI Tests?

Yes, you can lawfully refuse police DUI/OWI tests without penalty. However, there are exceptions, and in some situations, it may not be in your best interest to refuse these tests.  Therefore, before you make this decision, you should discuss your options directly with a lawyer.

Generally speaking, if you are stopped by the police for drunk driving in Michigan, and the police confirm that you’ve been drinking, then the police will ask for your driver license, registration, and proof of insurance.  After the officer runs your information through their computer and confirms there are no warrants our against you, then they will return to your car and ask you to step outside for the administration of several field sobriety tests. These tests usually include the standardized field sobriety tests, such as the horizontal gaze nystagmus, walk and turn and the one leg stand.  Other tests might include the alphabet and counting backward. If the police ask you to take these tests, and you refuse, then no penalty applies.

After you have either submitted to the field sobriety tests or refused them, the police with next ask you to submit to a preliminary or roadside breath test (PBT).  This test can also be refused, however, there is a penalty associated with a refusal of a PBT.  Such refusal is a civil infraction, which means it is not a crime. The penalty is a fine only.  There are no points assessed and there is no driver license sanction.

Contact Information