millerboycott.com

Because of their unpopularity, drunk driving cases are often used by police and prosecutors to chip away at the constitutional guarantees of our citizens.  See The DUI Exception to the Constitution.   Every once in awhile, however, the media shows a little courage and gets it right.  From an editorial in yesterday's New York Times:

Is the Driver Drunk?

Jan. 5.  New York, NY - The Fourth Amendment prohibits the police from searching individuals without a warrant, but the Supreme Court allows exceptions to that rule for “exigent circumstances” — when the police believe that the delay involved in getting a warrant would lead to destruction of evidence.

In Missouri v. McNeely, scheduled for argument at the court on Wednesday, the police forced a driver to take a blood test at a hospital without a warrant, after he refused to take a breath test with a portable machine when he was stopped for erratic driving. The blood test showed that his blood alcohol content was 0.154 percent, or almost twice the state’s legal limit.

The Missouri Supreme Court wisely ruled that the warrantless blood test was an unreasonable search because there was no emergency that prevented the police from getting a search warrant in a timely manner before the alcohol in the driver’s blood dissipated.

Missouri is now asking the United States Supreme Court to overturn the state court ruling and to radically revise Fourth Amendment law so that police — without a warrant — can draw blood from every person arrested on suspicion of drunken driving, regardless of the circumstances. The United States government, siding with Missouri, argues that warrantless blood draws are needed “to prevent the imminent destruction of evidence.”

But in 21 states, including Missouri, the police have successfully obtained thousands of warrants to get blood alcohol evidence.

If the Supreme Court applies the blanket rule Missouri seeks, it will diminish constitutional rights without increasing public safety in any meaningful way.

DUI BLOG

Sen. Mike Bennett from Bradenton has introduced a new bill which would allow Florida drivers to get ticketed for driving too slowly in the left lane. According to proponents of the bill, slow drivers in the left lane contribute to Florida pedestrian accidents and car accidents by creating traffic problems and instigating road rage that leads to aggressive driving.

According to statistics, drivers who drive too slowly in the left lane cause traffic delays, which then causes other drivers to become more aggressive in order to pass them. Slow drivers cause other drivers to speed up and weave around them experts say, creating unsafe conditions for everyone. Supporters of the bill say that the new law would make drivers more courteous.

Those who oppose the bill say that the law would punish law-abiding drivers. Some opponents also note that the real danger in most situations are speeding drivers and aggressive drivers – not drivers driving at or below the speed limit. Some opponents claim that the law sends the wrong message – to speed up rather than slow down – while other opponents claim that the law is just another way to ticket drivers.

Under current Florida legislation, drivers can only drive in the left lane when passing. However, this rule is not strictly enforced. Opponents of the current bill note that the new law would not be needed if the current legislation were better enforced. If the new bill does pass, it could become law as early as July of this year. Under the new law, drivers caught going too slowly in the left lane would get a ticket and fine of 3.

No conclusive studies have been done to determine whether reducing slow drivers in the left lane would reduce Florida car accidents. Supporters of the new bill note that it is just common sense to ticket drivers who are breaking current legislation and driving in the left lane. Opponents of the bill believe that the new law might not help prevent Florida car accidents.

Florida Car Accident Lawyer Blog