State v. Nielsen, 917 N.W.2d 159

On Dec. 17, 2015, Matthew Nielsen was stopped, arrested for suspected DUI, taken to a hospital, read the post-arrest chemical test advisement, and signed consent for a blood draw.
The State charged Nielsen with DUI based on the blood-test results; Nielsen moved to suppress the traffic-stop evidence and the warrantless blood draw as unconstitutional under Birchfield v. North Dakota.
Birchfield was decided June 23, 2016 — after Nielsen’s Dec. 2015 arrest; Nielsen argued Birchfield should apply retroactively to suppress the blood evidence.
The county court found the blood draw was not voluntary but denied suppression under the exclusionary rule’s good-faith exception, concluding the arresting officer reasonably relied on then-valid law.
Nielsen appealed to the district court but failed to file a statement of errors, so the district court reviewed only for plain error and affirmed; Nielsen appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Nielsen)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether the exclusionary-rule good-faith exception applies to warrantless blood draws taken before Birchfield	Birchfield renders pre-Birchfield warrantless blood draws unconstitutional; good-faith exception should not salvage unlawfully obtained evidence	Officer reasonably and objectively relied on then-existing law/statute; Davis/Leon support applying good-faith exception to pre-Birchfield draws	Court held the good-faith exception applies to pre-Birchfield warrantless blood draws (following State v. Hoerle)
Whether the State preserved the good-faith argument for appellate review	State failed to raise good-faith in county court, so cannot assert it on appeal	State cited Davis in the county-court briefing, which raises the Leon-based good-faith rationale; thus the issue was sufficiently presented	Court held the State sufficiently raised the good-faith argument; no plain error in considering it

Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (U.S. 2016) (warrantless blood draws implicate the Fourth Amendment and are unconstitutional in some contexts)
Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (U.S. 2011) (searches conducted in objectively reasonable reliance on binding appellate precedent are not subject to the exclusionary rule)
United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (U.S. 1984) (established the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule)
State v. Hoerle, 297 Neb. 840 (Neb. 2017) (applied good-faith exception to pre-Birchfield warrantless blood draws)
State v. Tompkins, 272 Neb. 547 (Neb. 2006) (discussed preservation and appellate consideration of the good-faith exception)