Edit Case Brief: Schmerber v. California

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

The action you have requested is limited to users in one of the groups: Bots, Administrators.

Case Summary

Case treatment
Cases that this case overturned:
Cases that this case partially overturned:
Cases that this case reaffirmed:
Cases that this case questioned:
Cases that this case criticized:
Cases that this case distinguished:
Cases that this case cited:
Cases that this case followed:
Related Cases:

Facts	Schmerber crashed his car while intoxicated. After the accident, police officers had medical staff draw blood from his car without his consent. The alcohol test proved that he had been driving under the influence of alcohol.
Procedural History
Issues
Arguments	Schmerber argued that using his blood against him violated his 5th Amendement right against self-incrimination. He had never consented to have his blood drawn.
Holding	The defendant's 5th Amendment right hasn't been violated.
Judgment
Reasons
Rule	The Court announced that the protection against [[Constitution_of_the_United_States#Self-incriminate\|self-incrimination]] doesn't apply to physical evidence such as the blood with alcohol obtained to convict the defendant. The 5th Amendment protection, according to the Court's interpretation, applies to testimonial evidence.
Comments	*[[Administrative search]]

Case Text Links

The following section is to enter opinion authorship for each opinion part (concurrences, dissents, etc.).

Opinion Authorship

Free text:

Summary: