Bemo v. State, 2013 OK CR 4

Appellant Warren Lee Bemo was convicted by jury of First Degree Manslaughter After Former Felony Conviction in Tulsa County; sentence: 27 years and $5,000 fine; judgment affirmed.
Appellant challenged the admissibility of blood test results for BAC and the authority of a paramedic to withdraw blood; Fourth Amendment challenge, if any, was deemed waived because raised in reply brief.
Appellant was the driver in a fatality; he was not arrested at the scene and was not removed out-of-state for treatment when blood was drawn.
Trial court admitted the blood test evidence; the issues concern whether withdrawal complied with applicable statutes and regulations.
The Board of Tests for Alcohol and Drug Influence authorizes certain persons to withdraw blood; EMT paramedics licensed with the National Registry and State Health Department were designated under policy for BAC determinations.
The court denied both propositions, affirmed the judgment, and noted sentence-parole terms.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether blood withdrawal was valid without arrest under §10-104(B).	Bemo contends withdrawal without arrest was improper.	The State argues §10-104(B) governs non-arrest withdrawals and is applicable.	Proposition One denied.
Whether EMT paramedics were authorized to withdraw blood under state law for BAC testing.	Bemo argues paramedics lack authority to withdraw blood.	The Board designated EMT paramedics as authorized; policy aligns with law.	Proposition Two denied.

West v. State, 798 P.2d 1083 (1990 OK CR 61) (blood withdrawal proper under §10-104(B))
Guest v. State, 42 P.3d 289 (2002 OK CR 5) (withdrawal permissible where appropriate under §10-104(B))
Sanders v. State, 60 P.3d 1048 (2002 OK CR 42) (statutory applicability when arrestee not arrested at scene)
State v. Young, 989 P.2d 949 (1999 OK CR 14) (interpretation of who may be lawfully required to submit to blood withdrawal)