SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO AM) - The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that the state’s D-U-I Implied Consent Law is unconstitutional.
Attorney General Marty Jackley says now a blood draw of a suspected drunk driver may occur only when there is consent, a warrant or urgent circumstances.
Jackley says the ruling follows a U-S Supreme Court decision that says natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream does not constitute a pressing circumstance.
He says the next Legislature will likely address any resulting public safety concerns and fiscal effects from the ruling.
The State Supreme Court affirmed the Circuit Court's ruling of granting the suppression of blood evidence in State of South Dakota vs. Shauna Fierro. Fierro was riding a motorcycle when she failed to stop at a stop sign and was pulled over by the Highway Patrol.
After Fierro was given a field sobriety check she was arrested and taken to the Meade County Jail where blood was drawn.
Sioux Falls police changed their policy on blood draws months ago soon after a key United States Supreme Court decision in April of 2013. Officer Sam Clemens says this State Court ruling just confirms that the city made the right decision.