Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/11-1425_cb8e.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

2 

MISSOURI v. MCNEELY 

Opinion of the Court 

I 
While  on  highway  patrol  at  approximately  2:08  a.m.,  a
Missouri police officer stopped Tyler McNeely’s truck after
observing  it  exceed  the  posted  speed  limit  and  repeatedly 
cross  the  centerline.    The  officer  noticed  several  signs 
that McNeely was intoxicated, including McNeely’s blood­
shot eyes, his slurred speech, and the smell of alcohol on his 
breath.  McNeely acknowledged to the officer that he had 
consumed  “a  couple  of  beers”  at  a  bar,  App.  20,  and  he 
appeared  unsteady  on  his  feet  when  he  exited  the  truck.
After  McNeely  performed  poorly  on  a  battery  of  field­
sobriety  tests  and  declined  to  use  a  portable  breath-test 
device  to  measure  his  blood  alcohol  concentration  (BAC), 
the officer placed him under arrest.

The  officer  began  to  transport  McNeely  to  the  station
house.  But when McNeely indicated that he would again 
refuse  to  provide  a  breath  sample,  the  officer  changed
course  and  took  McNeely  to  a  nearby  hospital  for  blood 
testing.  The  officer  did  not  attempt  to  secure  a  warrant. 
Upon  arrival  at  the  hospital,  the  officer  asked  McNeely
whether  he  would  consent  to  a  blood  test.  Reading  from
a  standard  implied  consent  form,  the  officer  explained  to 
McNeely that under state law refusal to submit voluntar- 
ily to the test would lead to the immediate revocation of his 
driver’s license for one year and could be used against him
in  a  future  prosecution.  See  Mo.  Ann.  Stat.  §§577.020.1, 
577.041  (West  2011).  McNeely  nonetheless  refused.    The 
officer  then  directed  a  hospital  lab  technician  to  take  a 
blood  sample,  and  the  sample  was  secured  at  approxi­
mately 2:35 a.m.  Subsequent laboratory testing measured 
McNeely’s BAC at 0.154 percent, which was well above the 
legal limit of 0.08 percent.  See §577.012.1. 

McNeely  was  charged  with  driving  while  intoxicated
(DWI),  in  violation  of  §577.010.1   He  moved  to  suppress 
—————— 

1 As a result of his two prior drunk-driving convictions, McNeely was