People v. Youn CA2/8
176 Cal. Rptr. 3d 652
Cal. Ct. App.2014Background
- Defendant Youn was involved in a serious DUI-related vehicle collision in Oct. 2011 in Los Angeles County.
- Officer Olson, a drug-recognition expert, observed defendant as combative, aroused, and agitated, suspecting stimulant influence.
- Defendant was sedated and transported to hospital; a blood draw was conducted about three hours after the crash without a warrant.
- Hospital staff had previously drawn blood that tested positive for amphetamine and cannabis; officer requested additional testing for alcohol as well.
- Trial court denied suppression, finding no deterrent effect from suppressing the blood results and noting the dangerous, ICU-ward circumstances.
- On appeal, the People contends the warrantless draw complied with the Fourth Amendment under McNeely and Schmerber, and Davis good-faith reliance applies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether warrantless blood draw was valid under totality of circumstances | Youn relies on McNeely to require a warrant when feasible | Youn argues no warrant needed given emergent circumstances and salutary police safety measures | Affirmed; not necessary to decide but good-faith applies |
| Whether exclusionary remedy applies given Davis good-faith reliance | Davis permits admission when police rely on binding appellate precedent | Davis does not excuse violation if McNeely dictated a warrant in the case | Evidence admitted; suppression not required due to objective good-faith reliance |
Key Cases Cited
- Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (U.S. 2013) (drunk-driving blood draws require case-by-case totality of circumstances)
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (U.S. 1966) (exigency in blood draws; dissipation of alcohol can justify warrantless test)
- Davis v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2419 (U.S. 2011) (good-faith exception; police not penalized for appellate errors when relied on binding precedent)
- Hawkins, 6 Cal.3d 757 (Cal. 1972) (blood tests incident to lawful arrest permitted if medically approved and reasonable)
- People v. Ritchie, 130 Cal.App.3d 455 (Cal. App. 1982) (drug dissipation comparable to alcohol; no need to identify drug to determine dissipation rate)