The Minnesota DWI Case Of The Week is Wilits v. Commissioner of Public Safety (Decided March 6, 2017, Published, Minnesota Court of Appeals) which stands for the proposition that the police do not "prevent or deny" a person's statutory right to obtain an additional test when they provide the driver with a county-issued medical-grade specimen container to collect the driver's urine sample.
I can't say that I disagree with the court on this one.
In Wilits, the appellant was arrested in Hennepin County for DWI and was taken to the jail for breath testing. After submitting to a data master test (which revealed an alcohol concentration of .11) he requested to arrange for an independent test. Mr. Wilits called his ex-wife who arrived shortly thereafter carrying a Tupperware container to obtain a urine sample.
Mr. Willits testified that he intended to use the Tupperware container to collect his urine sample until Deputy Caldwell gave him the county-issued urine-specimen cup and said, "You can use this one instead, sir." Willits provided a urine sample in the county-issued specimen cup and gave the specimen cup containing his urine sample and the Tupperware container to his ex-wife.
The Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety revoked Willits's driving privileges and Willits petitioned for judicial review of the Commissioner's revocation, arguing in part that law enforcement denied him his right to an additional chemical test. The District Court sustained the revocation and, in a published decision, the Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed.
First the Appellate Court points out that:
"In answering the question of whether an officer prevented or denied an additional test, this court "must draw a distinction between an officer's failing to assist and an officer's hampering an attempt to obtain such a test." Haveri v. Comm 'r of Pub. Safety, 552 N. W.2d 762, 765 (Minn. App. 1996) (emphasis omitted), review denied (Minn. Oct. 29, 1996)."Caselaw makes clear that officers must allow a sample to be collected and an additional test to be administered, but they need not act affirmatively to facilitate the test." Id. "The only obligation an officer has in assisting the [driver] in obtaining an additional test is to allow [the driver] use of a phone (citation omitted)"
"Relying on an unpublished opinion from this court, Willits argues that his statutory right to additional testing was violated because Deputy Caldwell denied him the right to use a container of his choosing to collect his urine sample. Willits argues that Deputy Caldwell interfered with this right when he went beyond his limited duty to provide Willits with a phone by giving him a government-issued specimen cup. This unpublished case is not binding on this court and is not relevant. In that case, we held that the defendant was denied his statutory right to an additional chemical test because jail policy prevented his wife from bringing a plastic receptacle into the jail to collect the defendant's urine for independent testing. But Minn. Stat. § 169A.51, subd. 7(b), does not give a person the right to use a container of the person's choosing to collect a urine sample. And unlike the unpublished case, law enforcement assisted Willits in vindicating his right to an additional test. Jail staff provided Willits with a phone to make arrangements for the test, and no one prevented M.G. from meeting Willits at the jail and giving him the Tupperware container. And no one prevented Willits from giving M.G. the specimen cup containing his urine...If anything, the deputy's actions benefitted Willits by providing him with a medical-grade specimen cup specifically designed to collect urine."
"Because Minn. Stat. § 169A.51, subd. 7(b), does not give a suspected drunk driver the right to use a container of his or her choosing to collect a urine sample, and because law enforcement did not prevent or delay the administration of additional chemical testing in this case, the district court properly sustained the revocation of Willits's driver's license."
Moral of the Story: If you get arrested for a DWI call an attorney before testing as he can advise you of your right to obtain an independent test.
If you or a loved one have been arrested for a Minnesota DWI, feel free to contact Minneapolis DWI Attorney, F. T. Sessoms at (612) 344-1505 for answers to all of your Minnesota DWI questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment