Forced To Give Blood For Drug Testing

[jf2oo6]

Can someone please help me out and tell me if this is legal or not.

My brother was out last night and went to a bar. He only had one drink and is 21 years old. after he left the bar he got pulled over. he has been driving on a suspended license due to unpaid tickets. so the cop than took him out of the car and gave him a sobriety field test. from what he tells me he said he did fine on the test, but the cop was still giving him a hard time. so the cop then arressted him (im assumming for the warrant for the unpaid ticket) and brought him to the station to do a breathalizer. he blew a 0.0 on the test. the cop then said that he had to be on something else. they asked for a urine sample and my brother refused because he would fail for marijuana which he had used a couple days prior. so they then took him to the hospital and took blood from him while he was hand cuffed without his consent. that morning when they released him from the jail. they gave him tickets for dui, dui in a school zone, reckless driving, taillight being out, and failure to keep right. he also says that he was driving fine, so i think the reckless was just a ticket to cover the cops ass.

can you guys please tell if the dui was justified? or even legal at that?

[jf2oo6]

i forgot to mention this all happened in new jersey

[aaron]

If they took blood, they presumably obtained a search warrant.

He can discuss his defenses to the charges with his criminal defense lawyer.

[jf2oo6]

i dont know if they had a search warrant. but dont those take a little while to get? this all happened in one night. and wouldnt they have to show that to him? he didnt mention any warrant to me.

[cdwjava]

Aaron, I don't know the status of the law in NJ, but in many states if we have probable cause to believe the person is under the influence of a controlled substance we can seize the blood without a warrant as it is evidence that is being destroyed (metabolized) with each passing moment.



- Carl

[jf2oo6]

but how can a blood test be proof that the person was driving under the influence. if someone smokes pot the thc will be in the blood for weeks. if someone smokes and then a week later is pulled over and given a blood test, should they be charged with dui? yes they commited a crime of smoking pot, but they didnt commit the charged crime of driving under the influence of a controlled substance.

[cdwjava]

but how can a blood test be proof that the person was driving under the influence.

By the drug or alcohol content.

if someone smokes pot the thc will be in the blood for weeks.

It's not the presence of metabolites that matters, but the presence of the substance in sufficient concentration to cause impairment.

In my state the mere presence of THC or a metabolite is no more probable cause for DUI than the mere presence of alcohol. Your state might be different.

if someone smokes and then a week later is pulled over and given a blood test, should they be charged with dui? yes they commited a crime of smoking pot, but they didnt commit the charged crime of driving under the influence of a controlled substance.

See above.

Methinks he overplayed his hand with regards to marijuana. His paranoia convinced him not to take a pass on something that might result in a license suspension for failure to agree to a chemical test. In my state if the officer had good cause to believe you were DUI on drugs, you would generally be compelled to provide the blood test (or urine, as requested) or risk a license suspension. Your state may not be the same.

He needs to speak to an attorney.

- Carl

[jf2oo6]

I understand that refusing a test will result in automatic license suspension. but he didnt refuse the breath test. he did this along with the field test, and did just fine on both. i just dont understand how the blood test can prove that he was under the influence at the time the cop says he was.

[cdwjava]

I understand that refusing a test will result in automatic license suspension. but he didnt refuse the breath test. he did this along with the field test, and did just fine on both. i just dont understand how the blood test can prove that he was under the influence at the time the cop says he was.

I don't know the laws in your state, but in most states, if the officer has good cause to believe a driver is operating a vehicle while under the influence of a controlled substance, then he can compel a blood test under the same theory of implied consent. So, if he refused a blood test after being told they suspected drugs, he could face a suspension for that refusal - even if later forcibly taken.

The evidence of impairment will be whatever the state has established as the concentration of a particular drug in your blood stream. As I said, in my state, THC would not be relevant - I suspect the same might be true in yours. Marijuana impairment generally depends on actual impairment. And, if he was sufficient impaired to fail the FST, then I suspect his concentration of THC will be rather high ... the residual metabolites that remain in the system after doing it days early should not even trip the meter on the state lab test for DUI.

- Carl

[jf2oo6]

well he is a heavier guy, and does smoke regularly and i would imaging he did smoke at some point throughout the day. but even so the high for a regular smoker only lasts about an hour or so. and from wat he says he did fine on the fst. but there should be video tape to prove that right?.

it just doesnt make sense to me how a dui can be given for thc, because it stays in the blood for such a long time.