Skip to comments.GEORGIA SUPREME COURT RULES POLICE CANNOT COMPEL DRIVERS SUSPECTED OF DUI TO TAKE A BREATHALYZER
Posted on 10/18/2017 9:20:53 AM PDT by JP1201
In a new ruling, the Supreme Court of Georgia clarified the rights drivers suspected of DUI have when it comes to interaction with law enforcement officers and the implied consent law.
The court made it clear that the state's constitution does not give law enforcement officers the ability to compel drivers suspected of driving under the influence to take a breath test by blowing into a breathalyzer.
It brings to question whether or not a defendant's refusal of a breath test can be submitted as evidence in their trial. As it stands, prosecutors can submit a defendants' refusal of the test. This new ruling changes that.
In a summary of the ruling, the high court wrote "the state constitutions protection against compelled self-incrimination applies not only to testimony but also to acts that generate incriminating evidence."
In a unanimous decision, the court overturned previous decisions which held that drivers do not have rights under the constitution to refuse a breath test requested by law enforcement officers.
(Excerpt) Read more at 13wmaz.com ...
So, will alcohol related auto deaths be going up in GA soon?
What can possibly go wrong? /s
A democrat must have gotten stopped.
Isn’t it if you refuse a breathalyze, your license is automatically suspended?
0.08% is a dumb legal limit anyway.
No implied consent law?
“...the court overturned previous decisions which held that drivers do not have rights under the constitution to refuse a breath test requested by law enforcement...”
Does this mean NO drunk tests without a warrant?
Hmmm. And you can’t be compelled to raise your hands if a law officer tells you to....
Probably not. This seems to all pin on the cop saying the breathalyzer wasn’t the state test, then using it as evidence.
A correct decision from the GA Supreme Court.
(To be struck down by a Federal Judge in 5...4...3....)
I was under the impression that Constitutional protections didn’t apply in these cases because a DUI offense is a motor vehicle violation, not a crime.
Depends if the auto is semi or full. Does it have a “bumper” stock? Crazy, I know.
The scolds here on on a roll
good luck with reason
Not a great thing. Now all those stupid drunks will end up in an ER waiting for a blood draw
You didn’t read the article!
No it isnt. People are impaired when at that level. They are driving a multi ton vehicle and are dangerous as well as stupid
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.