Ga. Court Strikes Down DUI Law Provision
The Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the implied consent statute of the state's DUI law that requires drivers involved in serious accidents to take blood tests is unconstitutional, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Oct. 6.
Under the provision, police have the authority to ask a driver involved in an accident that results in fatalities or serious injuries to submit to a blood test even if there is no indication that the driver was intoxicated or impaired.
Drivers who refuse the test have their driver's license suspended. In addition, the refusal could be used against them in court.
“While the state's interest in guarding the welfare and safety of its citizens with the perils caused by intoxicated drivers is beyond dispute, it is clear that a primary purpose of the implied consent law is to gather evidence for criminal prosecution,” wrote Justice Harris Hines for the court. “No matter how important that purpose may be, it does not create a special need to depart from the Fourth Amendment's requirement of probable cause; otherwise it could be argued that the state's interest in securing evidence in any situation of potentially serious conduct would justify dispensing with any finding of probable cause.”
Atlanta lawyer Bob Chestney, who filed the lawsuit for his client, Carey Don Cooper, supports the court's ruling, saying it would impact numerous cases.
“It's a bright day for the Fourth Amendment in these days we're living in where it's too popular to think that security is more important than personal liberty,” Chestney said. “It's refreshing to see our Supreme Court buck that trend. It's a victory for personal freedom from government intrusion.”
The court ruling keeps intact another portion of the law that requires a blood test if a police officer finds evidence of intoxication or impairment.
