State of Iowa v. Lee Allen Breuer, 808 N.W.2d 195

Breuer, driver in a one-car crash in Jasper County; odor of alcohol detected and unsteadiness observed; subsequent transport to hospital.
Breuer refused blood/urine tests; Iowa implied-consent procedures invoked; a blood-draw warrant was obtained from a Newton magistrate under Iowa Code § 321J.10.
Groves advised Breuer that a blood-warrant had been obtained and would be carried out; Breuer initially refused but consented after threat of force.
Stevenson arrived at the hospital with the warrant 10–15 minutes later; a copy of the warrant was placed with Breuer’s belongings.
Blood alcohol result was 0.171; Breuer charged with homicide by vehicle; district court denied suppression and the court of appeals affirmed; issue presented: whether withdrawal under a warrant not physically present violates the Fourth Amendment or Iowa Constitution.
Supreme Court concluded no constitutional violation; warrant need not be physically present to begin the blood draw under these circumstances.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a blood draw under a telephonic warrant is valid if the warrant is not physically present when the withdrawal begins.	Breuer argues warrant must be in hand before search.	State contends warrant not required in hand to begin the draw.	No constitutional violation; warrant need not be in hand to begin the withdrawal.

Groh v. Ramirez, 540 U.S. 551 (2004) (particularity does not require officer to serve warrant before search)
United States v. Grubbs, 547 U.S. 90 (2006) (anticipatory warrants; warrant need not be presented before search)
United States v. Banks, 540 U.S. 31 (2003) (Fourth Amendment lacks explicit warrant-handling requirements)
Cazares-Olivas, 515 F.3d 726 (7th Cir. 2008) (warrant possession not always required for search)
Ochoa, 792 N.W.2d 260 (Iowa 2010) (Iowa constitutional analysis aligned with Fourth Amendment on reasonableness)