State v. Kyle Nicholas Rios
371 P.3d 316
Idaho2016Background
- On Dec. 1, 2013, Kyle Rios was arrested after a car crash in Lewiston, Idaho, in which the other driver died; officer observed signs of intoxication and transported Rios to a hospital.
- At the hospital Officer Williams read the ALS advisory and presented a written blood-draw consent form; Rios declined to sign the form.
- Officer Williams then directed hospital staff to draw blood without obtaining a warrant; Rios did not verbally or physically resist and presented his arm.
- The blood test showed a BAC of .263; Rios was charged with felony vehicular manslaughter and felony leaving the scene.
- Rios moved to suppress the blood-test results as an unlawful warrantless search; the district court granted the motion, finding Rios revoked implied consent by refusing to sign the consent form.
- The State appealed, arguing refusal to sign (absent verbal/physical resistance) did not revoke implied consent and therefore the warrantless draw was lawful.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Rios) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred in suppressing the warrantless blood test when Rios refused to sign a blood-consent form but did not verbally or physically resist the draw | Refusal to sign alone did not revoke implied consent; without verbal/physical resistance, implied consent remained and the warrantless draw was justified | Rios’ refusal to sign the requested consent form revoked his statutory implied consent, so a warrant (or renewed consent) was required for a nonconsensual blood draw | The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed: refusing to sign a requested consent form withdraws statutory implied consent; absent a warrant or renewed consent the warrantless draw was unlawful and suppression was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Wulff, 157 Idaho 416 (Idaho 2014) (held implied consent under Idaho statute is revocable and must be analyzed for voluntariness at time of testing)
- Florida v. Jimeno, 500 U.S. 248 (U.S. 1991) (consensual searches are reasonable; scope judged by objective standard)
- Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141 (U.S. 2013) (natural metabolization of alcohol does not create a per se exigency permitting warrantless blood draws; implied-consent statutes cannot operate as irrevocable exceptions)
- Florida v. Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (U.S. 1983) (state bears burden to prove consent to a search was freely and voluntarily given)