State v. Spencer
333 P.3d 823
Ariz. Ct. App.2014Background
- Spencer was involved in a driving incident leading to a suspected DUI and BAC evidence from a medical blood draw.
- Deputy Franklin confronted Spencer, who refused medical care and any field sobriety or breath testing.
- Spencer agreed to hospital transport only after Deputy Franklin warned arrest would follow refusal.
- Hospital staff drew Spencer’s blood; BAC was .296% and used at trial.
- Spencer moved to suppress the blood-draw evidence as a warrantless seizure; the court denied the motion.
- Court concludes the medical-blood-draw exception did not apply because Spencer did not voluntarily consent, given the coercive ultimatum.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the medical blood draw was valid without a warrant | Spencer—consent was involuntary due to coercive ultimatum | State—consent was voluntary and draw for medical purposes | Convictions vacated; remand for new trial excluding blood-draw evidence |
| Whether probable cause and medical purpose satisfied the blood-draw exception | Probable cause existed but consent was not voluntary | If consent were voluntary, exception applies | Assumed for argument; voluntariness dispositive, the exception not satisfied due to coercion |
Key Cases Cited
- Estrada, 209 Ariz. 287 (App. 2004) (blood draw not valid when medical treatment is rejected; requires voluntary consent)
- Butler, 232 Ariz. 84 (App. 2013) (consent to blood draw involuntary when coercion or detainment occurs)
- Peterson, 228 Ariz. 405 (App. 2011) (State bears burden to prove voluntariness of consent)
- Fisher, 141 Ariz. 227 (App. 1984) (burden to show need for exemption from warrant requirement)