Birmingham DUI Attorney - Statewide DUI Defense. 1000's Handled! - News - JACKLEY: SOUTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT RULES THE STATE’S DUI IMPLIED CONSENT LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL
17558
page-template-default,page,page-id-17558,page-child,parent-pageid-15616,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,qode-title-hidden,qode-theme-ver-10.1.1,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-5.0.1,vc_responsive
JACKLEY: SOUTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT RULES THE STATE’S DUI IMPLIED CONSENT LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Attorney General Marty Jackley announced today that the South Dakota Supreme Court has ruled that the state’s DUI Implied Consent Law is unconstitutional by affirming the Circuit Court’s grant of the suppression of blood evidence in State of South Dakota vs. Shauna Fierro.

 

“The South Dakota Supreme Court has determined that a mandatory blood withdrawal under South Dakota’s implied consent statute is unconstitutional in light of a recent United States Supreme Court decision. Based upon today’s decision, a blood draw in a suspected drunk driving case may only occur when there is actual consent by the driver, a warrant, or exigent circumstances.

  • News

  • SIDE BAR