Wednesday, 22 May 2013 | buzz
The fourth amendment to the United States Constitution is supposed to protect citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures by government agents. But who decides what searches are unreasonable? That question is debated in the courts.
In April, a new US Supreme Court ruling determined that it may not always be allowable for police offers to order blood tests from non-consenting drunk driving suspects without a warrant. In the case MISSOURI v. MCNEELY, the Justices emphasized that each case must be decided individually on its merits. The result of this case may be that police departments err on the side of obtaining warrants or risk losing their case in court.
Criminal Defense Attorney John A. Birdsall joined Jan Miyasaki on the Wednesday 8 O’Clock Buzz on May 22, 2013, to discuss what this means. Birdsall is an attorney at Birdsall Law Offices in Milwaukee.