State v. Davis
161 N.H. 292
| N.H. | 2010Background
- State appeals district court’s suppression ruling on police seizure of hospital blood test results in a DWI case against Jacob Davis.
- Sept. 26, 2008, officer responds to intoxicated student; Davis transported to New London Hospital; driving prior incident reported.
- Hospital draws Davis’s blood for medical purposes; Davis refuses implied-consent testing under RSA 265-A:4; BAC later reported as .295.
- Oct. 2–3, 2008, police request hospital blood records under RSA 329:26; no warrant sought.
- Hospital releases lab report to police; Davis charged with aggravated DWI; motion to suppress filed on privacy/HIPAA grounds.
- District Court grants suppression; State appeals; issue framed as constitution/privacy/legislation; Supreme Court reverses and remands; HIPAA issue conceded by Davis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether warrantless request for hospital blood results violates NH Constitution | State argues RSA 329:26 authorizes disclosure | Davis argues privacy rights and HIPAA protections | No NH constitutional violation; RSA 329:26 carve-out and physician-patient privilege limitations apply |
| Whether RSA 329:26 carves out physician-patient privilege to permit police access | Statute exempts such blood test results from privilege | Privilege protects medical records; no disclosure unless exempted | Statutory carve-out applies; disclosure permitted under the narrow testing-for-diagnosis exception |
| Whether Ferguson v. Charleston governs this context | Ferguson is controlling for hospital-initiated testing with law enforcement | Ferguson is distinguishable; no law enforcement-initiated testing here | Distinguished; Ferguson diverts due to lack of law enforcement involvement; not controlling |
| Whether NH Constitution provides broader protection than the Federal Constitution | NH Constitution may be more protective | Federal baseline aligns or is not more protective here | NH Constitution offers at least as much protection; result same under both constitutions |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Goss, 150 N.H. 46 (N.H. 2003) (privacy/expectation of privacy in warrantless searches)
- State v. Summers, 142 N.H. 429 (N.H. 1997) (assesssing privacy interests in medical information)
- State v. Elwell, 132 N.H. 599 (N.H. 1989) (physician-patient privilege origin; blood samples exception)
- State v. Nemser, 148 N.H. 453 (N.H. 2002) (privacy protections in medical testing context)
- State v. Steimel, 155 N.H. 141 (N.H. 2007) (blood withdrawal as search/seizure)
- State v. Robinson, 158 N.H. 792 (N.H. 2009) (standard for reviewing suppression rulings)
- State v. MacElman, 149 N.H. 795 (N.H. 2003) (NH constitutional privacy standard)
- Ferguson v. Charleston, 532 U.S. 67 (U.S. 2001) (hospital policy; informed consent; Fourth Amendment applicability)
- State v. Nickerson, 147 N.H. 12 (N.H. 2001) (physician-patient privilege; diagnostic testing context)