Events Calendar
In This Section
Progress reported at troubled landfill
Summit engineer schedules summer road projects
State senate passes second temporary budget
Wadsworth parish unsure how pastor got Legionnaires' disease
Clydesdales to parade into Akron area
Barberton man found guilty in murder of heroin thief
Most Read Stories
Barbecue restaurant owner appeals mannequin's cover-up order
Suspect nabbed in child's death
Five years after attack, woman finds her way
Two men hurt in assaults in Kenmore
Hundreds in Canton for Tea Party
Promises look promising for Browns
New York congressman blasts Michael Jackson as 'pervert'
Blogs:
Pets:
Sunburn in canines and felines
The Heldenfiles:
Monday Notebook, New "90210" on DVD
Patrick McManamon:
Akron Zips:
Browns Bulletin:
Single-game ticket sales begin July 11
Tribe Matters:
Cleveland Browns:
Kent State Sports:
Men's Basketball Scheduling update
Cleveland Cavaliers:
All Da King's Men:
Blog of Mass Destruction:
Akron Law Café:
The Veil and the Burqa – Constitutional to Ban or Restrict?
Varsity Letters:
See Jane Style:
Picnic Wear
Car Chase:
Where do We Go from Here?
Let's Talk Real Estate:
ID My Bug
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Sound Check:
HRLite House:
DDI One of Best Places to Work
Akron Gamer:
Hot link: Best of Nintendo at E3
By Stephen Majors
Associated Press writer
POSTED: 01:48 p.m. EDT, Jun 24, 2008
COLUMBUS: Ohio is about to give police more leeway than most states to force a blood or urine test on certain people suspected of drunken driving.
The bill, which Gov. Ted Strickland is expected to sign later this week, would apply to people who had been convicted at least twice of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Under current law, authorities must get a warrant from a judge to test blood or urine for alcohol or drugs on people who don't initially give their consent. A few other states require mandatory blood testing but only when there has been a fatal crash or great bodily harm and police have probable cause that a driver is intoxicated.
''Driving in Ohio is a right not a privilege,'' said state Sen. Timothy Grendell, the Chesterland Republican who sponsored the bill. ''We can precondition that right on any condition we want that helps keep the other drivers on the road safe.''
Civil liberties advocates say the bill is unconstitutional, and they expect to challenge the law once it is enforced.
Requiring a warrant is the way that the judicial system can play its role in checking the power of the state, said Jeffrey Gamso, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.
''If it were really hard to get a warrant it would be one thing, but they can get a warrant in a hurry,'' he said. ''There's always a judge on duty.''
Grendell said a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision provides a solid legal foundation for his bill. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that authorities could compel a driver whom they had suspected of drunken driving to give a blood sample.
COLUMBUS: Ohio is about to give police more leeway than most states to force a blood or urine test on certain people suspected of drunken driving.
The bill, which Gov. Ted Strickland is expected to sign later this week, would apply to people who had been convicted at least twice of driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
Under current law, authorities must get a warrant from a judge to test blood or urine for alcohol or drugs on people who don't initially give their consent. A few other states require mandatory blood testing but only when there has been a fatal crash or great bodily harm and police have probable cause that a driver is intoxicated.
''Driving in Ohio is a right not a privilege,'' said state Sen. Timothy Grendell, the Chesterland Republican who sponsored the bill. ''We can precondition that right on any condition we want that helps keep the other drivers on the road safe.''
Civil liberties advocates say the bill is unconstitutional, and they expect to challenge the law once it is enforced.
Requiring a warrant is the way that the judicial system can play its role in checking the power of the state, said Jeffrey Gamso, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio.
''If it were really hard to get a warrant it would be one thing, but they can get a warrant in a hurry,'' he said. ''There's always a judge on duty.''
Grendell said a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court decision provides a solid legal foundation for his bill. In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that authorities could compel a driver whom they had suspected of drunken driving to give a blood sample.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
