Q: If blood is drawn before warrant is issued is it admissable in court

A: So was there a warrant for the blood draw, but the blood draw took place before the warrant was actually signed? I need more information to better answer your question. Nowadays where search warrants are sworn out over the phone, and fax machines are employed - mistakes in procedure can happen. The question is whether that mistake calls for suppression of the blood evidence. Unfortunately, the trend in Texas courts seems to be to find any reason whatsoever to justify law enforcements pursuit of DWI convictions.

Generally, the taking of a specimen of breath or blood is governed by the Texas Transportation Code, Section 724.012 which is the Texas Implied Consent statute. When you sign your drivers license you agree that if an officer asks you for a sample of your breath or blood, you agree to provide a sample. If you refuse, you are informed that you could lose your license, and that the officer can apply for a warrant to take blood. In Harris County, where I practice , blood warrants are routinely issued in DWI cases. There are limited exceptions where law enforcement officers can obtain a sample without a warrant. As a general rule, to comply with the Fourth Amendment, a search of a person's blood pursuant to a criminal investigation, requires a search warrant or a recognized exception to the warrant requirement, and must be reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. In DWI cases, the Supreme Court has recognized that the Fourth Amendment is implicated because the collection of a suspect's blood invades a substantial privacy interest, and the "exigent circumstances" exception to the search-warrant requirement is not established merely by showing that evidence of alcohol naturally dissipates from the body with the passage of time. It could be possible that a warrantless search of your blood was justified if it fell within a recognized exception to the warrant requirement. But that's where you need a lawyer to review the evidence in your case and make that determination. Was there an accident? Were you unconscious when the blood was drawn? There is case law in Texas that says if you were unconscious, you are deemed to not to have withdrawn the "implied consent" you gave when you signed your drivers license, to allow the State to draw your blood. Also, if you consented to a blood test, your consent disposes of their need to obtain a warrant - assuming your consent was free and voluntary and not the result of threats or coercion.

So talk to a lawyer, many will offer a free consultation - and see what they have to say about your situation. I hope this answer helped.

A: If blood was drawn before a warrant was issued, its admissibility in court depends on the circumstances surrounding the collection. Generally, the Fourth Amendment requires law enforcement to obtain a warrant based on probable cause before conducting such searches. However, there are exceptions to this rule that might apply, such as situations where there is an immediate threat to safety or evidence could be destroyed.

The court will look at whether the officers had a valid reason to bypass the warrant process. If the blood was taken under one of these exceptions, it is more likely to be admitted as evidence. On the other hand, if no valid exception exists, the evidence might be excluded to protect your rights.

It's important to seek advice from a legal professional who can evaluate the specifics of your situation. They can help determine whether the blood draw was lawful and advise you on the best steps to take in your case.