Supreme Court wary of warrantless blood tests in routine drunken driving cases

  • Article by: MARK SHERMAN , Associated Press
  • Updated: January 9, 2013 - 2:09 PM
  • 2
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 2 of 2
dlzabzJan. 9, 1312:10 PM

It's not the officers right to be a judge, jury and executioner. If he had enough evidence including a failed field sobriety test and his own testimony that's what he had it is then up to a jury. The constitution is to protect everyone.

0
1
rube223Jan. 10, 1310:42 PM

Get stricter laws and enforce them. Go zero tolerance, if you fpdrink, don't drive. Seems stupid to protect people from drinkinfpg and driving convictions. If you don't drink then drive, this will not affect you

0
0
  • 1 - 2 of 2

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT