State v. Giacomini, 2014 MT 93

At 2:27 a.m., Officer Weston stopped Joseph Giacomini for driving the wrong way on a one-way street and observed signs of intoxication (bloodshot eyes, odor of alcohol, poor performance on field sobriety tests).
Giacomini refused preliminary breath and intoxilyzer tests at the scene and again at the jail; records showed a prior breath-test refusal in 1990.
Officer Weston obtained a telephonic search warrant from Judge Fagg based on his sworn statements describing the stop, observations, SFST results, refusals, and the time-sensitive nature of alcohol dissipation.
YCDF personnel restrained Giacomini and drew blood (process was videotaped); testing showed BAC 0.12 and Giacomini was charged with DUI.
Giacomini moved to suppress the blood-test results (arguing lack of probable cause and privacy violation); Municipal Court denied suppression and later denied a post-omnibus “Request for Hearing” as untimely; he pled nolo contendere reserving suppression issues and appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of warrant/nonconsensual blood draw	State: Warrant supported by sworn facts (observations, SFSTs, prior refusal) and lawful under amended statute allowing application for warrant	Giacomini: Prior refusal alone cannot supply probable cause; blood draw violated privacy absent exigent circumstances	Court: Warrant issuance had substantial basis; totality showed probable cause. Prior refusal permits applying for warrant but did not substitute for probable cause; no constitutional violation shown
As-applied privacy challenge to warrant statute	State: Statute permits warrant applications; draw was performed by medical personnel per warrant	Giacomini: Forced blood draws for DUI absent injury/death violate Montana constitutional privacy protections	Court: Declined to entertain underdeveloped constitutional challenge; Collins controls that medically performed blood draws are not offensive or harmful; no as-applied relief granted
Timeliness of post-omnibus “Request for Hearing”	Giacomini: Video evidence of repeated needle sticks warranted reconsideration	State: Motion was untimely; omnibus deadline governs and video should have been presented earlier	Court: Request was filed months after omnibus; § 46-13-101 bars late challenges absent good cause; denial affirmed

Missouri v. McNeely, 133 S. Ct. 1552 (2013) (natural dissipation of alcohol does not create a per se exigency for warrantless blood draws)
Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for probable cause to issue search warrants)
Collins v. Dept. of Justice, Div. of Highway Patrol, 755 P.2d 1373 (Mont. 1988) (blood tests by trained personnel are not unduly offensive; admissibility where other offenses give warrant basis)
State v. Thompson, 674 P.2d 1094 (Mont. 1984) (blood samples drawn without consent inadmissible for DUI unless lawful basis)
State v. Cotterell, 198 P.3d 254 (Mont. 2008) (deference to magistrate’s probable cause determination)
State v. Greywater, 939 P.2d 975 (Mont. 1997) (motions to suppress must be timely raised at omnibus hearing)