According to the Wisconsin State Journal, Burnside ran over the median on the Highway 151 off-ramp, hit a lamp post, struck Mengelt, and hit a vehicle before being stopped by witnesses at a market and gas station on Davidson Drive.

Burnside allegedly told police that at the time of the crash he was adjusting his radio and GPS unit, and that he was running late for church. Though Burnside originally denied being drunk, his preliminary breath test was 0.128.

According to witnesses, Burnside was driving erratically prior to striking Mengelt, and did not hit the brakes following the crash. Burnside was formally charged with homicide by intoxicated use of a vehicle, homicide by negligent operation of a vehicle, hit and run resulting in death, and misdemeanor hit and run. The Dane County Circuit Court set bail at $150,000. Bail reverted to a signature bond with no cash down as Burnside entered an in-patient alcohol treatment program, HTRNews.com reported.

Burnside’s SUV heavily damaged in Drunk Driving Crash

According to the criminal complaint, the Bishop’s SUV was heavily damaged in the crash, with “heavy front-end damage,” a partially collapsed roof, missing front bumper and its back window was smashed out.

Assistant Dane County District Attorney Emily Thompson said in court that an oil trail shows Burnside pulled behind the gas station, backed up, drove over the curb, and then pulled to the gas station parking lot where witnesses stopped and held Burnside until police arrived, the State Journal reports.

Douglas Mark Van Puymbrouck pleaded guilty to his seventh drunk driving offense and will serve three years, pay a $1,500 fine, and three years extended supervision, reports the Superior Telegram.

Van Puymbrouck, 43, drove through a fence and two yards before police found him asleep in his vehicle, which was running at the time. Though Puymbrouck denied drinking that evening, a blood test was taken and results showed his blood alcohol concentration was three times over the legal limit.

Fifth Operating While Intoxicated Offense

Herbert Henry Hansen of Duluth also pleaded guilty to his fifth Operating While Intoxicated (OWI) offense, and was sentenced to seven months in jail and three years of probation, though he was granted a work release. The court revoked his license for 36 months, and he was fined $3,706.

Hansen was reportedly involved in a hit and run accident. Police were given a license plate number and a description of the driver. Police located Hansen asleep in his car, with the ignition running. The Superior Telegram reports that his blood alcohol concentration was more than twice the legal limit.

12 Beers Leads to Fifth Offense Operating with a Prohibited Alcohol Concentration

After being involved in a single vehicle crash, police found Luke John Fredrick walking down Highway 13, after he put his black SUV in a ditch. Fredrick had several lacerations on his face, was bleeding, and told the responding officer that his airbag had deployed. He admitted to drinking about 12 beers prior to the accident, and was found to have a blood alcohol concentration of 0.19, which is twice the legal limit.

Fredrick pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a year in jail and three years of probation. He was also granted a work release and fined almost $3,000 and his license was suspended for three years, the Superior Telegram reported.

Original article: Three men were sentenced last week after multiple offenses of driving drunk.

Madison, La Crosse and Jackson already have ordinances banning servers from consuming alcohol, however, an investigation by Gannett Wisconsin Media found that enforcement of the ban is spotty at best.

According to the Post Crescent, Neenah’s ordinance would prohibit servers from drinking while working, and from serving if they have a blood alcohol concentration level of 0.04 or more. Bartenders and servers who violate the ban could be fined $90 to $300.

Opponents “Dead Set Against Ordinance”

According to Dino Amundson, President of the Eau Claire City-County Tavern League, bar owners and the Tavern League of Wisconsin are “dead set against” an ordinance banning servers from drinking on the job. He told the WEAU that it’s the job of the bar owner to regulate if and how much a server can consume.

“There isn’t a bar or restaurant in the state of Wisconsin that doesn’t implement some kind of morals as to what their staff can and can’t do while they’re on premise,” he said.

National Bartenders Association President David Craver told the Post Crescent that “it’s not logical to start pinpointing people in a particular profession for prosecution.”

Other’s like ReUnion Station owner Rick Eiting says he doesn’t feel the police should monitor the conduct of his bartenders. “I don’t think the city should be regulating me on what I do,” he said. “If they do this, what’s going to be my next regulation? Will it be the color of toilet paper I use in the bathroom?”

Ordinances Not Often Used

While Eau Claire City Council Member Dave Duax told WEAU that a sober server ordinance could reduce the $160 million burden alcohol use puts on the county, the three cities in Wisconsin that already employ such an ordinance have seen little results.

In fact, police have only issued one citation in Jackson, La Crosse police have issued six citations since 2009, and though Madison also has an ordinance prohibiting servers from working while intoxicated, the Lieutenant Dave McCaw of the Madison Police Department said server conduct has been “basically left up to the bars.”

Senator Tim Carpenter (D-Milwaukee) is pushing for legislation that would give police departments across the state the option of using sobriety checkpoints to combat drunk driving.

However, some lawmakers have deep reservations about such a bill, including Neenah Representative Dean Kaufert, saying sobriety checkpoints could establish bad precedent. He told Fox 6 Now that currently police “have to have reasonable suspicion to stop you, they have to have reasonable suspicion. You kinda lose that with sobriety checkpoints and that worries some people about where we’re going to go from there.”

Sobriety Checkpoints Infringe on Civil Liberties

Unlike Carpenter, who feels that allowing police to randomly stop vehicles on public roads does not infringe on the rights of drivers, Kaufert calls the checkpoints an “infringement on civil liberties,” the Green Bay Post Gazette reports, and says the “Legislature is not ready for checkpoints.”

Carpenter remains undeterred, explaining to the Gazette that such a law “might send a signal to some people.” He told reporters that he isn’t against alcohol, he just doesn’t want a person to be able to drink and then use their car “as a weapon.”

The Cost of Sobriety Checkpoints and Wisconsin Resistance
While Carpenter and other debate whether sobriety checkpoints are good for Wisconsin, the regional program manager for the Bureau of Transportation Safety, Michael Panosh told the Gazette that the cost of sobriety checkpoints is a factor that should not be overlooked.

“Checkpoints are very expensive because they require a lot of manpower,” he said. “People can debate the fairness of checkpoints, but it must be realized that they are expensive.”

On the other hand, Panosh, who oversees several drunk driving task forces, says checkpoints “would work well with the task force model, given the number of people out there.”

However, as Neenah Police Chief Kevin Wilkinson discovered in 2009, when he tried to get the city to conduct voluntary checkpoints that would allow motorists to bypass the checkpoint if they did not show signs of impairment, Wisconsin isn’t interested in checkpoints of any type.

Wilkinson told Gazette reporters that there was a time he was optimistic about sobriety checkpoints, but “[t]here tends to be a lot of resistance or suspicion about government intrusion. At this point, I don’t think the climate is conducive to that occurring.” Despite Carpenter’s efforts, Wilkinson said he does expect Wisconsin to allow checkpoints anytime in the near future.

Jail-time, Fines, and License Suspension for Fifth OWI Offense in Wisconsin

A fifth conviction for OWI in Wisconsin can result in numerous detrimental outcomes, including incarceration, financial penalties, and restrictions on the ability to operate motor vehicles. Incarceration can range anywhere from six months to six years, while fines of up to $10,000 can be imposed. A two to three year driver’s license revocation will be imposed.

To understand the real-world consequences more fully, let’s examine two actual cases of those convicted of a fifth OWI.

A driver from Hatley was pulled over for a defective tail light by state troopers. The troopers determined the driver was operating under the influence, leading to his arrest and his fifth OWI charge. He was treated relatively leniently, receiving an 8 month jail sentence, 3 years probation and a 3 year revocation.

Another driver, from Watertown, was arrested and charged with his fifth OWI in September, 2010. He was found guilty and sentenced to 20 months in prison, $3,700 in fines, and his license was revoked for 36 months. Though neither man received the maximum allowable sentence, they are both facing serious jail time and driving restrictions upon their release.

Additional Penalties for Fifth OWI Offense

In addition to the revocation of their licenses, drivers facing a fifth OWI offense will be forced to use an ignition interlock device (IID) on their automobiles once they are legally able to drive. An IID uses technology similar to a breathalyzer, and requires the driver to breathe into the device before turning on the engine. If alcohol is detected on the driver’s breath, the ignition interlock device will prevent the car from starting.

Those who are eligible for an occupational license may be able to be back on the road in as little as 45 days. Not everyone, however, is eligible. In order to secure an occupational license, however, drivers must first obtain “SR-22 Insurance.” SR, which stands for “safety and responsibility;” refers to a document drafted by a driver’s insurance company and sent to the Department of Motor Vehicles. It acts as proof that the driver has, in fact, obtained insurance and is eligible to obtain an occupational license. It may be required for five years following an OWI conviction.

The proposed legislation would mandate a court appearance for all first-time offenders and will criminalize first-time offenders who had a blood alcohol level of 0.15 or above.

In a December 26th op-ed, the lawmakers explained the reasons for their legislation, which they described as aimed at those who “super drunk,” with a blood alcohol level of 0.15 and above, which is twice the legal limit. They described their goal as deterring bad behavior and making our roads safer even though the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration suggests enforcing laws are already in effect to protect vehicle occupants.

The key provisions of the proposed legislation:

***All those facing drunk driving charges for the first time will be required to make a court appearance.

***All first offenders who have a BAC of.15 will face criminal charges. This may come with a fine up to $1,100 and up to six months in jail. Second time offenders may also face increased penalties with higher fines and more jail time. A third offense would be a felony and allow seizure of the car used at the time.

***Mandatory minimum sentences would be set for OWIs which result in an accident, including six months in jail. Significantly, if the accident results in a death the mandatory minimum would be ten years in prison.

Many legislators oppose this legislation, in large part because the new law will require significant new government expenditures. Putting people in jail costs money, from increased costs for prosecutors and police to the cost of prison. Governor Walker’s spokesperson told the Journal Sentinel, “While Governor Walker supports cracking down on drunk drivers, he will evaluate the final versions of these bills when they reach his desk.” Municipalities also derive substantial income from the civil prosecutions. If these cases become criminal, the municipalities will lose that income.

Similar legislation has failed to pass in previous legislative sessions, in large part because of concerns that the increased penalties would result in substantial costs.

A Wisconsin DUI Lawyer Can Protect Your Rights

Although this legislation may not pass, people who have a record of drunk driving offenses always face the risk the state or federal legislature will increase penalties for multiple DUI offenses, so a conviction years ago when penalties were lighter may have serious consequences in the future.

Anyone facing any DUI charge should seek out the help of an experienced drunk driving lawyer. You should find one who is familiar with potential problems with testing equipment that may result in false readings and can challenge false readings. In other cases, a plea can be reached with fewer long-term consequences.

Surprisingly, for an adrenaline junkie with motorcycle and car racing experience, there is plenty of adrenaline in mountain bike racing and cyclocross. No problems there.

So, this week I found myself in Louisville, Kentucky for the Masters’ World Cyclocross Championships. I entered the race. This is only the second time in history that the event has been held outside of Europe (last year’s Master’s were here as a prelude to this years Elite Worlds). This may be the last in my lifetime – so let’s go racing!

I loaded up all of my gear and drove to Louisville on Monday. Checked into the Galt House, race headquarters and one of Louisville’s major hotels. Frankly, the Galt House is down at the heel, but they upgraded me to an apartment, with a kitchen and laundry; so who am I to complain? Now, with a kitchen, I can stick to my diet (which I have, mostly, done).

Tuesday morning, we got to ride the course. The Masters course was not the same course as the Elite World Championships. In fact, the Masters course was a bit bush-league. It was fairly uninteresting; it had poor parking and no real road for warmups. The narrow two-lane road fronting the venue was crowded with gravel trucks the whole time. I saw the Belgian national team as well as Steve Tilford (world champion for men 50-54) almost get whacked by trucks. The course was only technical in a couple of sections, and that was more due to weather conditions than layout.

Tuesday morning, the course was fairly dry and hard. It was great to be out on a world’s course, warming up with some very elite athletes. I felt pretty good (a bit of a cold, but nothing too much). My training and diet have been okay, and even though I am not in peak condition, I was ready to ride. The pre-ride was great.

I ran into my mountain bike compadre Stewart, who had also come down, for the experience of riding in a world championship. I admire Stewart. He seems extremely fit and he is a true sportsman. He competes for the love of the competition. For the life of me, I cannot figure out why I am faster than he, given my girth and his fitness. I bet in a long race, say four hours or more, he would shine.

Tuesday we ran heats. When I saw that on the schedule, I figured it would be hard for a Category 4 (meaning “slow”) guy like me to make the final on Thursday. As it turned out, with 65 entrants, there were slots for all of us in the final. The heats were for seeding, as the real contenders want to be on the front row. All I had to do was to finish the heat and I was in the final.

It was warm – in the sixties, but it was damp and felt chilly.

Really, I thought I ran the heat pretty well. Since we started at 2:30 in the afternoon, it had warmed up and softened up. It was just a little bit muddy. I even did a bike change in the pits, just to get a clean bike. Its amazing how much poorer a bike rides with a couple of pounds of mud stuck to it. So, I was glad that I had a pit bike. The fast guys have multiple pit bikes, with pit crews cleaning them between bike changes. Bike changes might be done every half-lap. I had to content myself with 1 bike change per race, as I had no crew. Also, I had to find my bike and switch, as opposed to a fast bike hand-off.

Well, I was not the slowest guy out there. Stewart and another guy had that distinction. And, for the whole first lap, I was hanging on the back of the field. Amazing! Then, the pace picked up and I could not match it. Still though, I pushed hard. The funny thing was the relatively flat, boring course kind of came to life at speed. The little bumps and twists were far more challenging. Two really hard laps in twenty minutes, over mud, grass, across a ravine (more of a ditch really), a twisty short downhill and a steep short downhill. No real climbing other than a couple of off-the-bike runups.

“Finals on Thursday, and I’m ready for this!” I thought I could move up a few places, maybe even be the fastest Category 4 (slow league) rider out there. I placed 53rd. I think the fastest Cat 4 guy was around 49th or so; so if I could move up a few spots, that would really be something.

Tuesday night, though, it rained…and rained…and rained.

Wednesday I pulled the single-speed mountain bike out of the trailer and rode down to the venue. There was standing water everywhere. This was an old golf course, in a flood plain along the Ohio, without drainage. It was unbelievably muddy. And it wasn’t all the soupy mud; some of it was the sticky mud with grass in it. The temperature had dropped to the thirties. Things had changed dramatically. I rode for an hour to stay loose, got a massage and chilled out.

Thursday morning dawned. I took a pre-ride from 8-8:30, finals at 10:30. It was 30 degrees. The ground was still soft, not frozen; but the air was cold and getting colder. The mud was a quagmire, like nothing you have ever seen. I rode one lap in the pre-ride and my bike was caked with a good ten to twenty pounds of mud. This was a slog – what the vets call a tractor-pull. Especially on the poorly-drained flats, which were most of the course, it was a struggle to move the pedals even in the lowest gear. The mud just sucked the wheels to a halt and caked the bike.

The company “WD-40 Bike” had set up bike washers, with guys who would wash our bikes. This is a feature of high-end cyclocross races: power bike washing in the pits and paddock. I waited in the line for the bike wash, and the fellow next to me noticed that the mud on our bikes was freezing solid. It was getting just a bit cooler, and when the mud got up off the ground onto the bike, it was starting to freeze. This was gonna be good!

I staged in the back. How cool was it to line up against Bob Downs, Don Myrah, Benny Anderson and other Olympic, elite athletes! Of course, from the back it was hard to see them, but……

GO! We were off! I was racing for the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP! Hell, if the 52 guys in front of me had trouble, I might win a RAINBOW JERSEY!

The first few hundred yards were on some pea gravel that had been laid out with traction and drainage. We stomped it. It was a fast start. We were pounding and I was keeping right with them. Then the pea gravel abruptly ended with a puddle of six inches of mud soup and a little bump. Chaos in front –hit the brakes!! I braked hard, avoided trouble and stomped it.

The rest of the race was a fight against the mud. Forty minutes of mud sucking your wheels, freezing to the bike, clogging your gears, your brakes, your chain and your wheels. I though I had a chance to get in three laps (I was wrong) so I planned a bike switch at one and a half laps. The fast guys switch every half lap. When I saw patches of the really wet, soupy mud, I aimed for them. The watery stuff actually washed the bike a little bit.

In the past, I had heard a race announcer talking about riders carrying “thirty pounds of mud.” I figured it was hyperbole. It wasn’t. The bike felt like it weighed 200 pounds. When I picked it up for the run-up, I could tell that there was a good thirty pounds of mud on it. A few times I used my hands to clear the mud away from the wheels and brakes. It helped a bit, so I kept going.

The last section of the lap is a runup – then a run along the top of the ridge, then a down the ridge in a twist, another runup and straight down. I shouldered my heavy bike for the runup. At the top, it was so caked that my wheels would no longer turn. They were frozen. I rolled the bike and it loosened somewhat. The top of this ridge was one of the muddier sections, believe it or not. Since it drained just a little better, the mud was less soupy – but more sticky. Like many riders, I ran the whole thing, probably 150 yards of mud. At the bottom there was a ditch full of muddy water. I stopped and used the muddy water to wash my bike. There I was, standing in my spandex in six inches of freezing muddy water, heart pounding out of my chest, panting, using my hands to wash the bike, thinking “I am, at this moment racing for the world championship. Weird!”

I kept going.

I could hear the race announcer talking about the leaders running up on the back-markers. I didn’t seem like I was about to be lapped, though…so I knew there were people behind me. The race announcer was talking about the leaders “pitting through the back-markers” and I was nearing the pit, but I still didn’t see them. I pitted and switched bikes. No big rush for a fast bike change – it didn’t matter since I was crawling out there anyway.

My goodness the clean bike felt GREAT… for about two hundred yards. Then it was almost as caked up as the first bike. More slogging.

It’s easy to get into a negative frame of mind in these situations. I call it, “playing negative tapes.” I mean, thinking things like, “This is so hard,” “I not good enough for this,” “I don’t belong here,” “This really hurts,” “I didn’t train hard enough” or “My diet wasn’t good enough.”

One of the real challenges of athletics is to maintain a positive frame of mind, in training, in dieting, in life and in the race itself. The negative tapes not only diminish the sheer exhilaration and joy of the sport, they diminish performance. I have caught myself playing negative tapes more than a few times in the middle of a race, and I knew to be alert in this race especially. So, when I caught myself thinking “I’m not fit enough for this,” I told myself to stop the negativity and remember that every competitor from the front to the back is struggling the same as me, and that I belong where I am, doing what I’m doing. It’s a lesson that I try to apply to life in general.

The crowd was great. Someone yelled “All the suffering will be worth it, when you finish!” Rich, the Wisconsin Cycling Association guy who officiates at our local races yelled “Go Milwaukee!” And Diane Ostenso, 64 years young and one of the best athletes in Wisconsin, cheered and cheered for me. After my race, she hugged me. I went out and cheered for her this morning in 12 degree, icy conditions as she rode an incredibly gutsy, fine race to finish 4th in the world and first in her age group.

I was lapped near the end of my second lap. The leaders had done three laps. My time in the heat was 10:51 for a lap. In the final, I was closer to 20 minutes. The leaders did the heat-lap in 8 minutes or so; but, for the final, even with frequent clean bikes, they were at 13 minutes per lap.

And, I didn’t finish last. Stewart was behind me. According to the scorers, we were the last two finishers. I was 51st. Bob Downs, the national champion didn’t finish. Henry James, a really good rider that I noticed at Nationals, won the world championship.

That was yesterday. Last night, I treated myself to a fancy steak dinner, oysters, martinis, dessert and port. I overindulged.

This morning, it is back to training and diet. Today, it is back to work. It is time to start preparing for next season. Do you think I have a chance to beat Henry James? I’ll give it my best shot!

Picture 1. American Champion, Bob Downs leading a group in the heats.

This is as close to the podium as I got: a photo op when no one was looking!

Bikes after the final.

The possible penalties for an OWI vary considerably depending on different factors. The number of previous offenses, the exact BAC level, who else is in the car, and similar details can alter available punishments. Significantly, if a driver causes bodily harm while under the influence, they face serious penalties. It goes without saying that if you face an OWI bodily injury charge, you should seek out the counsel of an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately.

OWI Bodily Injury in Wisconsin

As you might expect, if you cause injury while driving under the influence, the possible penalties for a conviction are steeper than if no one is injured. Under Wisconsin law there is a distinction between causing any injury and causing “great bodily harm.” In general, great bodily harm refers to serious harm that creates a substantial risk of death, causes serious and permanent disfigurement, or damages organ functioning. These definitions are vague. If you are charged with a felony injury, it may be that there is a good argument that the injury is only a misdemeanor level situation.

The first offense OWI with injury usually comes with a risk of a fine of up to $2,000 and jail time between 30 days to a year. However, if a minor under 16 years old was in the car at the time, the offense is a felony and the possible fines and jail times can double.

A second offense OWI with injury is far more severe. It is also a felony and comes with up to $10,000 in fines, along with 6 years in prison. An OWI causing great bodily harm comes with enhanced penalties. If convicted of this Class F felony, you may face a $25,000 fine and up to 12 ½ years in prison.

You Have Defense Options

It is easy to assume the worst when facing any DUI-related charge. But it is vital to remember that you have many legal options to both fight the charges and work toward less stringent punishments. An experienced OWI attorney can explain some of the most common defenses that might apply in your case.

For example, did the authorities follow proper procedure when collecting evidence about the incident and ascertaining your intoxication? If they cut corners or failed to respect your rights, then the charge may be challenged. Are the tests used to verify your alcohol content reliable? There are many examples of tests being tainted or handled improperly, leading to unreliable information that cannot stand in court.

Do not sit idly by and allow your life to be forever altered by an OWI conviction. Retain a qualified OWI lawyer and protect yourself.

While eleven OWI charges for a single driver are rare, it is not uncommon for local residents to have more than one charge related to drunk driving. For this reason, it is important to understand the consequences of multiple DWI convictions in our state. Wisconsin OWI laws as they relate to punishment increase in severity with each offense.

Consequences of 4th OWI

For example, what happens if you face a 4th OWI charge? Due to recent changes in state law, a 4th DUI in Wisconsin is a critical cut-off because it may lead to a felony conviction.

A 4th offense OWI is now a felony under the law if it occurs within five years of a previous drunk driving offense.

All OWI convictions may have serious long-term ramifications, but having a felony conviction is particularly burdensome. It can follow you indefinitely when applying for jobs, government licenses, and even housing. It goes without saying that you must do everything in your power to defend yourself in these situations.

The specific consequences of a 4th offense OWI felony are severe. You may face fines of up to $10,000, three years of license revocation, and up to three years in jail. On top of that, an ignition interlock device must be installed on your vehicle (at your own, not insignificant, expense). You will also be required to obtain the high-risk auto insurance, SR-22. Expectedly, it costs significantly more than traditional insurance.

Even if the 4th offense change is not a felony (because you had no prior OWI in the last five years), the penalties are substantial. The criminal misdemeanor may carry a $2,000 fine and up to a year in jail. An ignition interlock device is required, as is purchase of SR-22 insurance.

Defending Yourself Following an OWI Charge

Considering the consequences, it is imperative to obtain experienced legal professionals to protect your rights. For both the felony and criminal misdemeanor charges, probation may be an option to reduce actual jail time; but probation carries with it the burden of supervision.

The first responsibility of an OWI defense attorney is to investigate and analyze the case, to determine how it can best be challenged. In some cases, it may even be prudent to fight the charges altogether. Police officers may have acted improperly or errors may have been made when determining your blood alcohol content. No matter what the situation, the first step is always to contact an OWI attorney as soon as possible.

The next responsibility of an OWI defense attorney is to refer the client for appropriate counseling and treatment. This is a legal necessity, as the system looks carefully at how a defendant addresses alcohol issues while the case is pending. Its also just smart, as it may be time to deal with the problem.

Finally, a good defense attorney always tries to negotiate the best possible resolution with the prosecutor; but, if that is not realistic, the lawyer must be capable of putting up a fight.

Forced warrantless blood draws have been a standard practice in Wisconsin for decades.  The practice was first allowed “in exigent (urgent) circumstances” in the 1966 United States Supreme Court Case, Schmerber v. California.  Wisconsin addressed the practice in 1993, in Wisconsin v. Bohling.

A person arrested for DUI (called OWI in Wisconsin) is often asked by the police to consent to a blood draw.  If the person declines to give consent, they will be charged with the separate offense of refusal to submit to a chemical test.  The blood will then be drawn anyway, by force if necessary.  This will be done without a warrant, or any request to a judge for a warrant.  The justification is that there is not time to get a warrant before the alcohol dissipates from the blood.

For decades, we Wisconsinites (and, I must admit, Wisconsin lawyers) have accepted the practice as routine – status quo.  It was rarely if ever challenged in Wisconsin, and then only on grounds of reasonableness of the specific blood draw (cleanliness, etc.) rather than on constitutional grounds.

Congratulations to those Missouri lawyers who took on the challenge and refused to be bound by accepted practice.  They have shown us that the “That’s the way we do it,” method of government policy must always be questioned and often challenged.  Also, congratulations to Maryland attorney Lenny Stamm for acting on behalf of the NCDD in its amicus curiae brief.

By the atmosphere of the oral argument in Washington, it seems as though the United States Supreme Court may very well rule that this practice, accepted in Wisconsin for so long, is a violation of our constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

We should have been challenging it all along.