and even if we were to say there was some sort of extra circumstance here which there is not even then i would not say the legal drug testing in this case an officer still must house probable cause to believe that a driver is under the influence of drugs or alcohol and only that couple exigent circumstances might excuse an officer spelling to obtain a warrant because there was no probable cause here and exigent circumstance can not save the legal to commit to proven arity while the state must prove that his driving was approximate cause of the injury or death now proximate cause must mean something more than just being behind the wheel of the vehicle otherwise there independence that conduct the injury or death would not have occurred this means there must be a reasonable certainty that the defendant acts cause the injury legal cause is a question of foreseeability and essentially the question is captain almost instantaneously clearly saw the child didn't look either direction before pulling out from and from in between the two being he only came out a passenger side of the game only that as far as the passengers from  means we don't know as far as that report we cannot assume the troopers only reported him referring to carl's is the same as the legal terms of art that meet use when referring to proximate cause most importantly in a interview the defendant inspecting the beautiful driven by a bit taking measurements at the point of impact to the point where the vehicle came to rest was forty six feet and discussing the dead the accident was deputy ash truth no man would testify that in his opinion the accident was unavoidable and there was no reason to issue any traffic citation to the defendant and this is true for government of the state witness in the situation for the stipulated bench trial now at the trial co determined that the accident was unavoidable and where a state trooper after his investigation concluded that the act that was one of the unavoidable and that he would not even ticket m intact over onto the side of the road and he saw fire swift approaching it looked like he was speeding so the driver activated his emergency flashing light switch it was either a landing on a cornfield in this case and swear it was the driver who said possibly intentionally self serving statement that he could not avoid the accident in this case we have an impartial eye witness who said that mr hayes could not indication of a violation you can determine that after the fact you can just take them to the hospital have them drug tested or whatever and say that they're under arrest because a reasonable person would think that they were under a involved in a personal injury accident he was the driver in a vehicle involved in a personal injury action but ok so but what i gather from mr mansion argument is a does it matter really what the facts were in this case that his reading of the statute of five a one point six it is you have an accident and there's any personal injury or death involved you can go in and draw blood and you don't have to  there rather than there they're arrested under arrest they're taken to the hospital there doesn't have to be any tickets issued and they don't have to have a warning or a receipt oh yes your hon