Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

if I recall, you can refuse to take it. They then take you to a station for a blood test (may need a warrant).

Depends largely on state though, but armed with this reporting you can probably sue if you face consequences of refusing (implied Consent doesn’t ring as valid if the test is not valid). Not a lawyer though...


This advice is very wrong for many states. In NC, for example, you will have your license suspended if you refuse a breath test (regardless of actual intoxication.)

And sure, you could sue, but if your defense rests on invalidating implied consent laws, I sincerely hope you have the time and money to fight all the way to the state supreme court.

As you say, it depends on your jurisdiction. In Norway, if you refuse to take a breathalyzer test you'll have a blood sample taken whether you like it or not.

Additionally, if you do consent to a breathalyzer test and it shows traces of alcohol, a blood sample is taken to determine the exact BAC (And, presumably, also to be used as evidence.)

>you'll have a blood sample taken whether you like it or not.

Are you saying they can forcibly take blood without your consent?

In the UK it's my understanding that you can refuse all testing but if you do that you will be charged with a separate offence which has similar penalties to the drink driving offence you're trying to wriggle out of.

In the US they can forcibly draw blood with a warrant. I don’t think they can without a warrant, but I’m not 100% sure.

-Yes, that is my understanding, though I haven't had any first-hand experience with anything but breathalyzer testing.

Further, from what I've been able to gather refusing a breathalyzer test does not lead to another charge; refusing the blood test will.

Are you saying they can forcibly take blood without your consent?

Presumably a positive on a breath test is considered probable cause for a more invasive search.

In the UK, 'medical reasons' are grounds for refusing a breath test and requesting a blood test instead. The gov.uk website [0] doesn't identify any other excuses than can be used.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/stopped-by-police-while-driving-your-righ...

In pretty much every state if the officer had probable cause to pull you over and you refuse to take a breathalyzer they can arrest you.

However an officer can't just demand you take the breathalyzer without probable cause. (DUI checkpoints are an exception to the requirement for probable cause.)

In Indiana, if you are tested at a hospital with blood test, then jurors are required to back-date the alcohol to the time of arrest and assume the highest reading. Proof be damned.

The law was passed in 2008, and I sat on a case as a juror that went over this very detail.

You mean in that case they arrest you. Chances are if you've been drinking that a breath test will incriminate you. If you choose to skip a breath test you leave the cops with a choice to arrest you or let you go, if they pulled you over then they probably would feel the need to arrest you. Which means that you'll be getting a blood test at the station. A blood test at the station may or may not be the best choice depending on how much you had to drink and when. If you just had some shots and immediately get pulled over you may be more intoxicated for the blood test. If you stopped drinking a while ago then delaying to the blood test could help you look less intoxicated. The idea is that you want to choose based on what is best in your current situation. Its best not to drive under the influence and avoid the situation entirely.

Also atleast in Germany, if u not refusing and the breath test says u drunk, they will have to take a blood test anyways

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact