Bobeck v. Idaho Transportation Department
Idaho Court of Appeals
1Dissent
Judge GUTIERREZ,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that Bobeck consented to a blood draw. Since the United States Supreme Court issued Missouri v. McNeely, — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1552, 185 L.Ed.2d 696 (2013), the Idaho Supreme Court has not yet addressed unconscious drivers within the context of Idaho’s implied consent law. In my view, an unconscious individual is incapable of giving the consent required for a warrant-less blood draw. Because Bobeck did not give actual consent to the blood draw, there is no warrant requirement exception applicable here. The…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Missouri v. McNeelySupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- State v. Micah Abraham WulffIdaho Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. PadleyCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2014
- State v. Felicity Kathleen HaynesIdaho Supreme Court · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.