DWI Laws Cloudy as the Year Begins

The new year has brought with it many questions regarding Minnesota’s DWI laws and their enforceability. Recent appellate court decisions are creating more questions than providing answers.

In Minnesota, it’s a crime to refuse a blood alcohol test if an individual is suspected of DWI. The arresting officer does not require a warrant to request this test. He/she merely needs to remind drivers of Minnesota’s implied consent laws. However, the appellate court has ruled that police do need a warrant if they’re administering a blood or urine test. They don’t need a warrant if an individual consents to a breathalyzer.

These discrepancies and other concerns about the legality of punishing individuals for refusing a BAC test will be reviewed by the Supreme Court this year. It is quite possible the Supreme Court will agree that Minnesota’s implied consent laws violate an individual’s constitutional rights.

Supreme Court Review

Law enforcement and judges in Minnesota are eagerly awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision. In several cases, judges have issued stays as they await the final answer from the Supreme Court. Individuals arrested for DWI that were administered either blood or urine tests without a warrant may have their cases thrown out. Drivers penalized for refusing testing altogether may also have their cases thrown out by the court. Drivers who consented to breathalyzers are likely to see their cases proceed without delay as these are not currently considered unconstitutional. However, if the Supreme Court rules that law enforcement must obtain warrants for blood or urine tests in the future, it is likely they will include breathalyzers.

Current Minnesota Law

Under current Minnesota law, individuals convicted of violating the state’s implied consent laws face an automatic 1-year revocation of their license. If an individual has any previous DWI convictions, the court will add 1 year of suspension for every violation. When the Supreme Court reviews the legality of implied consent laws, it is likely they will decide these punishments are unenforceable. Because of this anyone convicted of a DWI, or violating the state’s implied consent laws should contact a Minneapolis DWI lawyer to determine how these rulings could impact a pending case or previous conviction.

Expected Timeline

The Supreme Court is not expected to rule on implied consent until later this year. That means that for now law enforcement will not seek warrants for any form of sobriety testing. While prosecutors will no doubt file charges and pursue penalties for refusing testing, courts will likely issue stays.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.