Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Fourth Amendment

Criminal Law

: Fourth Amendment

OH4: Catheterized defendant did not abandon his urine

By John Wesley Hall, Jr.

Defendant was hospitalized for an accident, and an officer wanted a blood draw. Defendant refused to consent. Defendant had a catheter installed, and the officer asked for the urine before it was disposed of. Defendant did not waive his expectation of privacy or abandon his urine, and his actions showed that he wanted to maintain his expectation of privacy. State v. Funk, 2008 Ohio 4086, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 3449 (4th Dist. August 7, 2008): [*P17] Here, we find that competent, credible evidence does not support the trial court's finding that Funk abandoned his urine (waste) before it went down the commode. He did not do a single thing (act) to even suggest that he was abandoning his urine. In fact, he expressed his desire to maintain his privacy by not consenting to a chemical test for alcohol content...continue to full post

Full post as published by Fourth Amendment on August 15, 2008 (boomark / email).