Summary
This document is Javier Rodriguez’s reply to the State’s petition for discretionary review in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. It argues that the Transportation Code did not authorize a warrantless blood draw, that the State failed to establish exigent circumstances, and that remand for additional findings of fact was unnecessary.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Texas Transportation Code created an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement permitting the warrantless taking of Rodriguez's blood.
- Whether the evidence supported the trial court's determination that no exigent circumstances justified the warrantless blood draw.
- Whether the absence of written findings of fact and conclusions of law required remand.
- Whether the Court of Appeals properly resolved the implied-consent issue under the Transportation Code.
Key quotations
“Here, there is no evidence that Officer Jordan could not have taken steps to obtain a warrant because he never even considered obtaining one.” (slip op. at 12)
Factual background
According to the brief, Rodriguez was arrested in connection with a DWI offense and was taken to a hospital. Law enforcement obtained a blood sample without first obtaining a warrant or attempting to obtain consent. Approximately 50 minutes elapsed between notification that Rodriguez's driver's license was being suspended and the blood draw, and Rodriguez was expected to remain at the hospital for a substantial period. The officers testified that they believed the Transportation Code made the blood draw mandatory and did not attempt to contact a magistrate or otherwise obtain a warrant.
Procedural history
The State appealed from the 319th Judicial District Court's granting of Rodriguez's motion to suppress. The Thirteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the suppression ruling in Cause No. 13-13-00335-CR. The State then petitioned the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for discretionary review, and Rodriguez filed this reply requesting that review be denied. The source does not contain the Court of Criminal Appeals' subsequent disposition.