Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/11-1425_cb8e.pdf
Page Number: 7.0

Cite as:  569 U. S. ____ (2013) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

the results of the blood test, arguing in relevant part that,
under  the  circumstances,  taking  his  blood  for  chemi­
cal  testing  without  first  obtaining  a  search  warrant  vio- 
lated  his  rights  under  the  Fourth  Amendment.  The  trial 
court agreed.  It concluded that the exigency exception to
the warrant requirement did not apply because, apart from 
the  fact  that  “[a]s  in  all  cases  involving  intoxication,
[McNeely’s]  blood  alcohol  was  being  metabolized  by  his
liver,”  there  were  no  circumstances  suggesting  the  officer
faced  an  emergency  in  which  he  could  not  practicably 
obtain  a  warrant.    No.  10CG–CR01849–01  (Cir. Ct.  Cape
Giradeau  Cty.,  Mo.,  Div.  II,  Mar.  3,  2011),  App.  to  Pet. 
for  Cert.  43a.    On  appeal,  the  Missouri  Court  of  Appeals
stated  an  intention  to  reverse  but  transferred  the  case 
directly  to  the  Missouri  Supreme  Court.    No.  ED  96402 
(June 21, 2011), id., at 24a. 

The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed.  358 S. W. 3d 65 
(2012) (per curiam).  Recognizing that this Court’s decision 
in  Schmerber  v.  California,  384  U. S.  757,  “provide[d]  the
backdrop”  to  its  analysis,  the  Missouri  Supreme  Court 
held  that  “Schmerber  directs  lower  courts  to  engage  in
a  totality  of  the  circumstances  analysis  when  determin­
ing whether exigency permits a nonconsensual, warrantless
blood  draw.”  358  S. W.  3d,  at  69,  74.    The  court  further 
concluded  that  Schmerber  “requires  more  than  the  mere
dissipation of blood-alcohol evidence to support a warrant­
less blood draw in an alcohol-related case.”  358 S. W. 3d, 
at 70.  According to the court, exigency depends heavily on
the existence of additional “ ‘special facts,’ ” such as whether 
an  officer  was  delayed  by  the  need  to  investigate  an  ac- 
cident  and  transport  an  injured  suspect  to  the  hospital,
as  had  been  the  case  in  Schmerber.  358  S. W.  3d,  at  70, 

—————— 

charged  with  a  class  D  felony  under  Missouri  law,  which  carries  a  

maximum  imprisonment  term  of  four  years.    See  Mo.  Ann.  Stat.
 
§§558.011, 577.023.1(5), 577.023.3 (West 2011).