Drawing Blood from a Drunk Driving Suspect: Missouri v. McNeely

Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Teleforum

On April 17, 2013, the Supreme Court decided Missouri v. McNeely. In an opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Court held that the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream over time does not constitute an exigency under the Fourth Amendment to sufficiently justify a non-consensual, warrantless blood test in a drunk driving case. Other members of the Court split in interesting ways. Our expert will provide an analysis of the case and provide his thoughts on the decision’s potential implications.

Featuring:

• Mr. John G. Malcolm, Senior Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation

On April 17, 2013, the Supreme Court decided Missouri v. McNeely. In an opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Court held that the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream over time does not constitute an exigency under the Fourth Amendment to sufficiently justify a non-consensual, warrantless blood test in a drunk driving case. Other members of the Court split in interesting ways. Our expert will provide an analysis of the case and provide his thoughts on the decision’s potential implications.

Featuring:

• Mr. John G. Malcolm, Senior Legal Fellow, Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, The Heritage Foundation

Call begins at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time.

Teleforum calls are open to all dues paying members of the Federalist Society. To become a member, sign up here. As a member, you should receive email announcements of upcoming Teleforum calls which contain the conference call phone number. If you are not receiving those email announcements, please contact us at 202-822-8138.