New DWI law

[iamacop]

Okay, a buddy of mine made a DWI with child arrest two days ago. Does anybody's agency have a policy in place with the new law? My department is still working out the kinks, but have not set anything in stone.

Since a warrant is not needed, should we just take the arrested person to he hospital to draw blood, or should we read his DIC-24 on the side of the road, and if he agrees, just take him to the station to blow, but if he refuses take him to the hospital?

Anybody with suggestions or policy from your department regarding this new law?

[usmcrob]

The law states that if the person refuses to provide a voluntary breath or blood specimen at the request of a peace officer, then the officer shall require the taking of a specimen. You have to ask them first if they are willing to provide a specimen voluntarily. If they are not, then it's off for blood. The way that we do it is we always read the DIC-24 on the roadside. If they agree to provide a breath or blood sample, then so be it. If they refuse, then it's off to the hospital for a mandatory blood draw. There is a new form that goes along with the mandatory blood draw, the THP-51. Shoot me a PM is you need a copy of it.

[powerstroked]

1. Do everything the same as before
2. if you get the refusal then proceed to the nearest hospital and sit on there head and use there nose like the finger holes in a bowling ball so the nurse can get the sample.
3. then throw him in the pokie

Not near as detailed as Rob's but hey no ones ever is.

[iamacop]

How did I know that the two APD guys would be the first to know? Thanks much, ya Rob, can u send me the form, I'm sure we have it but I'm too lazy to search our forms room...

[iamacop]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong. I've been watching a commentary with an attorney stating that even if there is no probable cause to believe that an individual is intoxicated, that we can still pull the blood as long as they meet one of the elements (With child, accident with injury, etc?)

[Texas55]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong. I've been watching a commentary with an attorney stating that even if there is no probable cause to believe that an individual is intoxicated, that we can still pull the blood as long as they meet one of the elements (With child, accident with injury, etc?)

Not right....You have to have probable cause of intoxication and then the rest of the elements to take the mandatory blood. There has been some incorrect media stories and a lot of bad information has been put out. They still have to be intoxicated and you just can't go and draw blood from anyone involved in a collision.

[powerstroked]

1. Do everything the same as before
2. if you get the refusal then proceed to the nearest hospital and sit on there head and use there nose like the finger holes in a bowling ball so the nurse can get the sample.
3. then throw him in the pokie

Not near as detailed as Rob's but hey no ones ever is.

any questions? That is as long as the meet the requirements for mando blood

[usmcrob]

Also, correct me if I'm wrong. I've been watching a commentary with an attorney stating that even if there is no probable cause to believe that an individual is intoxicated, that we can still pull the blood as long as they meet one of the elements (With child, accident with injury, etc?)

Like TX55 said, there has been a )(&%$@(&%^ load of really bad media coverage on this. The bottom line is that you have to already have placed the person under arrest for DWI before the new mandatory draw laws come into play. The defense liars and dumb***** reporters that are spreading the word that we can now go up to anyone involved in a crash and start sticking them are full of crap. It is the exact same as the previous mandatory draw laws (SBI or Fatality), just we can now stick for more things. They still have to be under arrest, they still have to refuse to voluntarily consent, then you get to stick 'em.

[Native Texan]

It is my understanding that the new law only applies on 2nd offense DWI's and if someone suffers serious bodily injury as a result of an accident involving DWI. In these cases we don't need a warrant for a blood draw. Right? First offense DWI is unchanged as far as I know.

[usmcrob]

It is my understanding that the new law only applies on 2nd offense DWI's and if someone suffers serious bodily injury as a result of an accident involving DWI. In these cases we don't need a warrant for a blood draw. Right? First offense DWI is unchanged as far as I know.

The new law applies to the following arrests:

Intox Manslaughter (Felony 2)
Intox Assault (Felony 3)
DWI 3rd or more (Felony 3)
DWI w/ Child Passenger (SJF)
Any DWI arrest where a person other than the driver suffered bodily injury and was transported to a medical facility, due to the intox driver causing a crash
Any DWI and the person has a previous Intox Manslaughter, Intox Assault, or DWI w/ Child Passenger conviction

If they cause a crash and someone other than the driver goes to the hospital with any injury, then it can still be a DWI 1st, but the new law applies.

[913]

Toss in a child abuse charge on the driver as well. May not fly with some DA's, but negligently putting a child in danger by driving intoxicated should be considered, and juries just love it.

[powerstroked]

oh yea and dont forget you get to do it if they have 2 priors for setting up carnival equipment while intoxicated as well!!!! I know it sounds a touch squirrelie but i do wanna find one of those. How many people can say they have made that arrest. Bet Rob cant!!!!!!!!!!!

[usmcrob]

oh yea and dont forget you get to do it if they have 2 priors for setting up carnival equipment while intoxicated as well!!!! I know it sounds a touch squirrelie but i do wanna find one of those. How many people can say they have made that arrest. Bet Rob cant!!!!!!!!!!!

Nope, can't say that I have. My best is a FWI on a drunk parachutist j/k

[SOI]

Our agency still hasn't gotten anything set up for this. As usual no one where I work will do anything until after it's too late. Right now our hospitals will only take a blood draw for medical reasons. So if you just bring a prisoner in for blood and they aren't injured or needing any type of medical treatment, they aren't allowed in the hospital. If they are admitted for medical treatment and a blood draw is needed for hospital purposes, they will take it for their purposes but won't tell us anything about it due to HIPPA and we'll have to guess as to whether or not the blood is of evidentiary value and get a warrant for it. The new law puts the responsibility on us to get blood but does not require the hospital or anyone else to get it for us. So until our agency gets some sort of agreement with the hospital they can continue to refuse us.

[usmcrob]

Our agency still hasn't gotten anything set up for this. As usual no one where I work will do anything until after it's too late. Right now our hospitals will only take a blood draw for medical reasons. So if you just bring a prisoner in for blood and they aren't injured or needing any type of medical treatment, they aren't allowed in the hospital. If they are admitted for medical treatment and a blood draw is needed for hospital purposes, they will take it for their purposes but won't tell us anything about it due to HIPPA and we'll have to guess as to whether or not the blood is of evidentiary value and get a warrant for it. The new law puts the responsibility on us to get blood but does not require the hospital or anyone else to get it for us. So until our agency gets some sort of agreement with the hospital they can continue to refuse us.

Have you looked at the new THP-51, Statutory Authorization form? Here is an excerpt from it.

Therefore, I now am invoking my authority under TRC, Section 724.012(b), to require the suspect to submit to the taking of a specimen of the suspect’s blood as required by TRC, Section 724.012(b).

Pursuant to my authority under TRC, Section 724.012(b), this is an ORDER FROM A PEACE OFFICER to you to draw a specimen of blood from the suspect. As provided by TRC, Section 724.017, the person who takes a blood specimen under TRC, Chapter 724, or the hospital or medical facility where the blood specimen is taken, is immune from civil liability for damages arising from this ORDER to take the blood specimen if the specimen is taken according to recognized medical procedures, although TRC, Section 724.017 does not release a person from liability for negligence in the taking of the specimen. Under TRC, Section 724.017, the taking of a blood specimen from a person who resists the taking of the specimen does not in itself constitute negligence and may not be considered evidence of negligence. A person whose blood specimen is taken under TRC, Chapter 724, is not considered to be present in the hospital for medical treatment or screening unless the appropriate hospital personnel determine that medical treatment or screening is required for proper medical care of the person.

We have had more than one medical professional arrested for failure to obey a lawful order from a peace officer.