Court Opinion

ID: 9758721
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 23:41:31.621613+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:54.345565
License: Public Domain

Dissenting opinion by
Boss, J.,
I dissent on the ground that it was error to admit testimony relative to the blood taken from the defendant against Ms will. In my opinion, this taking of his blood constituted an outrageous and unjustifiable violation of defendant’s person.
I agree completely with Chief Justice Belt of the Oregon Supreme Court who in his dissenting opinion in State v. Cram (cited supra in the majority opinion) stated at page 292 of 160 P. 2d, page 963 of 164 A.L.B.: “To extract blood by hypodermic needle from a person accused of crime, without his consent . . . for the purpose of obtaining evidence to be used against him, shocks my sense of justice and decency.”