[JoeRed]

“Hardly. Patient confidentiality is a very real issue. HIPAA and the 4th Amendment are in play here.
The unconscious person in her hospital was the victim of a head-on collision caused by a perp (who died in this same collision) the Utah police were chasing.
There is no cause for this victim’s blood to be drawn.”

On the contrary, federal law requires a blood test be taken when a commercial truck driver is involved in a fatal collision regardless of who is at fault.

[Leaning Right]

> federal law requires a blood test be taken when a commercial truck driver is involved in a fatal collision regardless of who is at fault <

But that’s something a truck driver knows going into the job. It’s implied consent. For everyone else, the Fourth Amendment applies.

[IYAS9YAS]

On the contrary, federal law requires a blood test be taken when a commercial truck driver is involved in a fatal collision regardless of who is at fault.

Thanks for that. I knew that at one time, but had forgotten it.

The question is, did the officer relay that information to the nurse. If not, then the nurse is still in the right, and officer is still in the wrong.

[drjimmy]

On the contrary, federal law requires a blood test be taken when a commercial truck driver is involved in a fatal collision regardless of who is at fault.

Can you please post the text of this law, or at least a link to it? That way we can see where it says that a police officer can draw blood from an unconscious commercial truck driver.