Florida’s Implied Consent Law
In Florida, the implied consent law can be found at Florida Statute Section 316.1932. The implied consent law in Florida gives greater protection to those in DUI cases who are required to submit to chemical testing than is required under the federal or state constitution.
The implied consent law does all of the following:
- limits the power of law enforcement officers to require a person lawfully arrested for DUI to give samples of breath, urine or blood without the person’s consent;
- sets out the methods by which samples may be taken and tested.
Any person who accepts the privilege to drive and who is lawfully arrested for any offense allegedly committed while driving or in actual physical control is “deemed to have given his/her consent” to submit to a breath, blood or urine test.
For the results of the chemical test to be admissible at trial, the defendant does not need to read or understand the “implied consent” law. The courts have found that the failure of a defendant to be read the implied consent law does not provide a basis for suppression of test results.
By accepting the privilege to drive in Florida, the defendant has consented to submit to an approved chemical test. Sambrine v. State, 386 So.2d 546 (Fla.1980); State v. Gunn, 408 So.2d 647 (Fla. 4thDCA 1981); Kurecka v. State, 67 So.3d 1052 (Fla. 4thDCA 2010).
Special Requirements for Breath or Urine Testing
Section 316.1932(1)(a)-(b) allows for breath and urine testing but does so only incidental to a lawful arrest “for any offense allegedly committed while the person was driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence.” Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Whitley, 846 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 5thDCA 2003); State v. Serrago,875 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); DHSMV v. Hernandez, 74 So.3d 1070 (Fla. 2011).
Under Section 316.1932(1)(a), the administration of one type of test does not preclude the administration of another type of test. State v. Korth, 875 So.2d 790 (Fla. 3rdDCA 2004); Section 316.1932(1)(a)1.b., provides:
“Any person…in this state is, by so operating such vehicle, deemed to have given his or her consent to submit to a urine test for the purpose of detecting the presence of chemical substances as set forth in §877.111 or controlled substances if the person is lawfully arrested for any offense allegedly committed while the person was driving or was in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of chemical substances or controlled substances.”
When does a defendant impliedly consents to a test of his or her urine under Section 316.1932? The defendant impliedly consents to a test of urine under Section 316.1932 only in cases in which a law enforcement officer has a reasonable basis to believe the person was driving under the influence of a controlled substance.
This article was last updated on Friday, May 10, 2019.