I just checked with Monroe Attorneys Crawford and Boyle on the law in Georgia, and according to them, under Georgia law if no consent is given to draw blood, a search warrant is required.

I know I have read in many police reports where there is a charge of DUI - refusal, so that makes sense. It would seem that if you believe that a test would prove your innocence, there would be no reason to refuse it - just my opinion anyway!

No. There are too many drunk and impaired drivers on the road. Police shouldn't have to jump through hoops to do their job. If you're not under the influence of alcohol or drugs, what's the problem? I believe when you get your GA drivers license you give implied consent by signing your license.

As Sharon said, if refused, can legally get a warrant. You can't get a warrant without a reasonable amount of suspicion, so one's rights aren't being violated as long as Georgia law is followed.
And as MM said, it would not look very good in court for the alleged guilty party.

I just reread the article. I had a thought. Drawing blood is the most accurate way to preserve evidence as soon after an incident as possible. If it is used for evidence, then why would an Officer be required to wait if evidence can dissipate with time? For some reason, the link that LG posted wouldn't pull up for me. I'd like to read more about implied consent laws.

I have no problem jumping through a reasonable amount of hoops in order to do my job. Accepting the job of a police officer means protecting the public while preserving the rights of the citizens. If I make it a point to always perform my job with integrity, then that reputation willy carry more weight in the criminal justice system -- police officers, prosecutors, judges and defense attorneys all have their place.

Tammy, generally (in Georgia) if someone refuses a breath/blood test, the officer will simply mark "refused" and make the decision based on whatever other probable cause that they have -- it's pretty rare that they would seek a search warrant in those circumstances unless it was a fatality case or there were some other significant mitigating circumstances since, as it has already been noted, that refusal itself can be used against you in court. In other cases where there is a matter of exigency or preservation of evidence, the warrant requirement may be waived. So it will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court has to say on this matter.

Thanks MM. My job is similar. I've only had my testimony question one time and learned from that. From then on, I had my paperword in order. I do the same thing as far as simply writing "refused" and let them explain why.
It will be interesting indeed.

Bob & Roger you're obviously unfamiliar with Law Enforcement procedures. Sure there are officers out there that live by their own rules, but they're the exception. By and large the ramifications of NOT following the laws protecting civil liberties result in such penalties that make violations very unworthwhile. I respect a person's rights. But I also respect the law. In all my years of experience it seems to me that failure to comply to REASONABLE search is indicative of something to hide.

My comment is specific to a suspected impaired driver. If police knocked on my door and wanted to search my house, I would want to see a search warrant. There are so many ways a driver can appear impaired. Thanks to cell phone use erratic driving doesn't always mean someone is under the influence of alcohol or drugs. But, once pulled over there are many signs that a person is under the influence of a substance. If I were pulled over (Roger Long) I would submit to a pat down. That is for the safety of the officer. I would prefer a blood draw. Dash cam videos are another good tool. I prefer a blood draw because a breathalyzer only deals with alcohol. Many people believe they are not breaking the law if they are taking prescription medication (prescribed for them). They are if it impairs their driving. If you have nothing to hide and know you are not under the influence I would look at a blood draw as bolstering your case in court. Take a look at Gwinnett Mugshots and see the number of people charged with DUI. Do you really want to make it harder for the police to get those drivers off the road. And those are only the ones that were caught. I bet you have never been the victim of a drunk driver. The majority of police officers do their job with integrity. There is always the occasional unethical one that makes headlines.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated..." - US Constitution, 4th Amendment

What is more unreasonable than being subjected to a medical procedure by law enforcement? You want blood, get a warrant. Where does it end? Soon you will have to donate a kidney for an expired tag.

You have signed your GA DL and already given implied consent. If you want to further complicate things you have right to refuse the breathalyzer and make the police get a warrant for a blood draw. If you are innocent it would be in your best interest to comply. If you would rather make a point, you risk losing your license to drive for an extended period of time as well as considerable fines, classes, community service and attorney fees.

Most people, especially the ones here, will not recognize the police state until the military boot smashes their face.

.... or until they take my kidney for my expired tag

hey and if THAY fail it ,thay should be put to death .