STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DALE EDWARD HOLLINGSHEAD, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court reversed suppression orders for blood test evidence in DUI and hit-and-run cases, holding that voluntary consent is not always required for blood draws under State v. Mitchell.
Voluntary consent to blood withdrawal is not always required when blood tests are obtained under circumstances recognized by State v. Mitchell.
[1] Under State v. …
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the donor's voluntary consent to withdrawal of a blood sample is immaterial”
Court discussing the holding of State v. Mitchell regarding circumstances where consent is not required for blood tests.
Hollingshead was arrested following a fatal accident and charged with leaving the scene and vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. Blood tests were…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Voluntariness Of Consent cases and more on FLexlaw
Dale Edward Hollingshead was separately informed against for leaving the scene of an accident involving a fatality, proscribed by F.S. Section 317.071, F.S.A., and manslaughter by operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated, proscribed by F.S. Section 860.01, F.S.A. The state appeals an. identical order in each case, which granted defendant’s motion to suppress the results of blood tests administered to him in the hospital after his arrest following the accident.
Mr. Hollingshead did not voluntarily consent to the withdrawal of the blood sample. We think it evident from the record that the court granted the motions to suppress the blood test solely because of the absence of voluntary consent on the part of the defendant. However, the trial court did not at that time have the benefit of the opinion of the Supreme Court of Florida in the case of State v. Mitchell, 245 So.2d 618, opinion filed March 3, 1971, recognizing that under certain circumstances the donor’s voluntary consent to withdrawal of a blood sample is immaterial. See also, Schmerber v. State of California, 384 U.S. 757, 86 S.Ct. 1826, 16 L.Ed.2d 908 (1966), and Wilson v. State, Fla.1969, 225 So.2d 321.
The order appealed in each case is reversed and these causes remanded for the purpose of the motions being further considered in light of the authorities above cited, with the court authorized to conduct a further evidentiary hearing on the motion in each case to the extent it deems it necessary or desirable to do so.
Reversed and remanded.
WALDEN and REED, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (U.S. 1966)
- State v. Mitchell, 245 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1971)
- Wilson v. State, 225 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1969)