PA Court Rules DUI Blood Draw Law In Accident Case Unconstitutional
Posted in DUI on June 19, 2025
In a major decision that reshapes DUI enforcement in Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled on June 17, 2025, in Commonwealth v. Hunte (No. 16 MAP 2023), that warrantless blood draws from unconscious DUI suspects are unconstitutional under both the U.S. and Pennsylvania Constitutions.
Key Takeaway
The Court struck down Section 3755 of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, which allow the police to require medical personnel to draw blood if a driver was invovled in an accident and suspect of DUI. The law allowed the police to obtain blood of an unconscious person without first obtaining a warrant to obtain evidence in a driving under the influence case.
Case Background: Commonwealth v. Hunte
Larry Wardell Hunte was involved in a serious car accident in 2019 and rendered unconscious. At the hospital, without obtaining a warrant, a Pennsylvania State Trooper ordered a blood test under 75 Pa. C.S. § 3755. The test revealed alcohol and controlled substances, leading to multiple DUI-related charges, including homicide by vehicle while driving under the influence.
The trial court found the statute unconstitutional. On appeal, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court unanimously affirmed.
Legal Analysis: Fourth Amendment and Implied Consent
The ruling emphasized that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution protect individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures. The Court concluded:
The “implied consent” provision in Section 3755 does not substitute for actual consent or a judicially authorized warrant.
The law lacks sufficient safeguards and does not meet the constitutional requirements for exceptions to the warrant rule.
Even unconscious individuals retain a reasonable expectation of privacy in their bodily integrity.
Implied consent laws do not override constitutional protections.
Exigent circumstances must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis—not presumed by statute.
The statute is facially unconstitutional, meaning it is invalid in all applications, not just as applied to Mr. Hunte.
Law enforcement must obtain a warrant or actual voluntary consent before drawing blood from an unconscious DUI suspect.
Final Thoughts
The Commonwealth v. Hunte ruling significantly strengthens Fourth Amendment protections in Pennsylvania DUI cases. By invalidating Section 3755, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has clarified that constitutional safeguards must be respected, even in high-stakes public safety scenarios.
This case is a great example of the importance of hiring an experienced DUI defense attorney. The challenged law had been accepted and used since 2004. It took a team of creative DUI lawyers to bring this successful challenge to the law and thereby protect the constitutional rights of the people.