U.S. Supreme Court Vacates Urine DWI Conviction

Posted On July 05, 2016 by Jay Adkins

As we reported two weeks ago, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on the constitutionality of warrantless blood an breath test, finding warrantless blood tests as unconstitutional searches, while drawing a line in the sand and finding the exact opposite for warrantless breath tests. What was not decided in that opinion is the constitutionality of warrantless urine tests and crimes based on refusing such urine tests. However, today Ramsay Law Firm received an order that sheds light on how SCOTUS views the issue.

The case at hand deals with a warrantless urine test that was obtained after the driver was told refusal to submit to the test was a crime. Originally, Minnesota appellate courts upheld the admission of the urine test and the criminal conviction, finding no constitutional violations. However, today's order form the U.S. Supreme Court vacates the conviction and requires the Minnesota Court of Appeals to reevaluate their original holding in light of of Birchfield v. North Dakota, 579 U.S. ___ (2016).

This case will be closely connected to the Thompson case Dan Koewler argued at the Minnesota Supreme Court on June 8th. Check back for updates as we will continue to post all of the latest developments.