Background
Guadalupe Gonzales Kesen pleaded guilty to misdemeanor driving while intoxicated, second offense. The trial court sentenced her to 365 days in jail, suspended the sentence, and placed her on community supervision for 24 months.
After Kesen refused to provide a blood or breath sample at the county jail, the arresting officer obtained a search warrant for her blood. A licensed vocational nurse prepared Kesen’s arm and inserted the needle into her vein, while the officer attached collection vials to the tubing. Kesen moved to suppress the blood and derivative evidence, arguing that the officer’s participation made the collection unreasonable under the federal and state constitutions and Section 724.017 of the Texas Transportation Code.
The Court’s Holding
The Texas Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of Kesen’s motion to suppress. The court held that the record supported the conclusion that the blood draw was conducted reasonably under the totality of the circumstances. The valid warrant supplied legal justification for the search, and venipuncture is a presumptively reasonable method of obtaining blood.
The court agreed that merely attaching a collection vial to a vacutainer, without taking any other action in collecting the sample, did not mean the officer conducted the blood draw. The licensed vocational nurse performed the preparatory steps and inserted the needle. Even assuming the officer’s conduct amounted to performing part of the draw, Kesen presented no evidence that it adversely affected her safety, health, dignity, or privacy or created an unjustified risk of infection or pain. The court also explained that Section 724.017 did not control because the blood was drawn under a warrant.
Key Takeaways
- An officer does not conduct a blood draw merely by attaching collection vials after a qualified medical professional prepares the patient and inserts the needle.
- A defendant challenging a warrant-authorized blood draw must overcome its presumption of reasonableness with evidence that the procedure improperly affected safety, health, dignity, or privacy.
- Section 724.017 of the Texas Transportation Code is not the exclusive measure of Fourth Amendment reasonableness and does not govern a blood draw performed under a warrant.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes medically significant steps in a blood draw from limited assistance with collecting the sample. It indicates that an officer’s participation in handling collection equipment does not by itself make a warrant-authorized draw constitutionally unreasonable.
For suppression challenges, the opinion underscores the importance of evidence connecting any departure from standard practice to the bodily intrusion’s actual effect on the defendant’s safety, health, dignity, or privacy.