This new law allows blood to be drawn by a “trained phlebotomist who is operating under a hospital protocol, has completed phlebotomy training through an educational entity providing such training, or has been properly trained by a current or former employer to draw blood.”  The website www.phlebotomycertificationguide.com explains the typical certification process for phlebotomists and provides training course length than ranges from 4 to 24 months.  As discussed in Steve’s previous post, Tennessee law does not specify the amount of training required.  Certainly a very minimal amount of training could qualify one under this new law considering  the fact that the person need only receive training from “a current or former employer.”

The lawyers at Oberman & Rice continue to monitor pending legislation that impacts the criminally accused, paying particular attention to those involving Tennessee DUI cases.  Should you have any questions about a pending Tennessee DUI law or issue, you may contact Steve, Sara, or Nate by calling (865) 249-7200.  You may also wish to review our website for additional information about Tennessee DUI Laws by clicking here.

A registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, clinical laboratory technologist, clinical laboratory technician, licensed emergency medical technician, licensed paramedic or, notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, licensed emergency medical technician approved to establish intravenous catheters, technologist, or certified and/or nationally registered phlebotomist or at the direction of a medical examiner or other physician holding an unlimited license to practice medicine in Tennessee under procedures established by the department of health.

Remarkably, there are no provisions in this bill detailing the amount of training or even requiring that the person drawing the blood pass a proficiency test.  Nor are there provisions requiring a judge to determine that probable cause (the legal grounds required for arrest) exists before the blood is taken from the body.

While I am certainly far from a health care professional, I have had substantial experience as a non-certified phlebotomist when I worked in a hospital blood laboratory, albeit about 35 years ago.  I am aware of some of the potential complications from an improper blood draw such as thrombophlebitis, infection, damage to blood vessels, hematoma/bruising, and damage to the nerves near the venipuncture site.

Moreover, the proposed law gives no consideration to the fact that the officer may suffer from a contagious disease, is working in poor lighting conditions, or may be distracted by law enforcement duties during the blood draw. If a medical condition occurs during a blood draw—the criminally accused would have no immediate access to a healthcare provider for treatment.  In some situations, such as infection, the symptoms, etc. may manifest long after the actual blood draw.

Not surprisingly, the proposed law provides that the person drawing blood shall not incur any civil or criminal liability as a result of drawing the blood, except for damages that may result from negligence.  This means that a law enforcement officer with minimal training would be allowed to draw blood from a suspect with their arm on the hood of the police vehicle or similar unsterile environment.  This could be done without supervision from any other person, opening the door to abuse and negligence that would be difficult to prove except in a rare circumstance where the invasion of one’s body would be documented by video.

In 2006, Ann Japenga, a reporter for the New York Times, wrote about her debilitating injury that, after much suffering, was determined to have been caused by the needle going through her vein and causing dangerous but invisible bleeding into her arm.  The injury, caused by a phlebotomist in her doctor’s office, required surgery “to prevent permanent loss of the use of [her] arm, as well as a condition called “claw hand” that causes your digits to curl up like a sea anemone.”  The full article can be accessed here: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/30/health/30case.html.

Simply allowing the injured party to sue for negligence, as Senator Kelsey proposes, is not an appropriate remedy.  This type of case would have limited allowances for recovery.  With few exceptions, Tennessee law limits recovery against governmental entities to the amount of $300,000.00 pursuant to The Governmental Tort Liability Act.  Furthermore, this type of recovery would likely require the services of a civil lawyer who would (and should) charge a fee for his or her services.  Accordingly, the injured party would likely receive less than two-thirds of a recovery after attorney fees.  Moreover, expert fees, deposition costs and other trial expenses would have to be borne by the injured party.

If you have ever had a medical professional who is certified to draw your blood need to “stick” you on several occasions to obtain a sufficient sample, you can only imagine the type of abuse a suspect would receive from an uncertified law enforcement official.  I urge you to contact your Legislator to vote against this bill.

It is also most interesting that Senator Kelsey is sponsoring another bill making it a crime that carries a penalty of up to 30 days in jail for a law enforcement officer to unlawfully install a tracking device on a person or object (2012 Senate Bill 3046).  If he doesn’t trust a police officer to comply with a citizen’s right to privacy, how in the world would he expect an officer not to abuse a suspect when they stick a sharp object into their arm or other part of their body?

The lawyers at Oberman & Rice frequently monitor pending legislation that impacts the criminally accused, paying particular attention to those involving Tennessee DUI cases.  Should you have any questions about a Tennessee DUI issue, you may contact Steve, Sara, or Nate by calling (865) 249-7200.  You may also wish to review our website for additional information about Tennessee DUI Laws by clicking here.

No matter what testing mechanism is used, the tests are not foolproof.  Machines malfunction.  Like a toaster, dishwasher, or hair dryer, machines wear down and break over time. Devices that collect and analyze blood, breath and urine are no different.  Some machines and methods are less reliable than others.  The tests are further subject to error by those persons involved in the collection and analysis processes.

A Tennessee DUI attorney should be familiar with the different tests and machines used in Tennessee.  Hiring a motivated Criminal Defense lawyer gives someone the opportunity to fight all of the facts.  In some cases, it may be possible to prevent the chemical test result from being used as evidence.

Additional information about Tennessee DUI offenses can be found on our websites at www.tndui.com and www.duiknoxville.com.   You may also speak with one of our attorneys, You may reach Steve Oberman, Sara Compher-Rice or Nate Evans, by calling (865) 249-7200.

In this investigation, police officers were charged with the task of calibrating these devices to ensure accuracy.  However, according D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles, city police improperly adjusted the machines.  The machines, as calibrated, showed a driver’s blood-alcohol content to be approximately 20% higher than it actually was.  On average, the jailed suspects spent at least 5 days in jail.

This can happen to you. Years ago, Tennessee dealt with a similar problem of flawed tests. In 1990, a police officer exposed how easily these so called “high tech” devices could be manipulated. During a trial, an attorney discovered that a Davidson County police officer demonstrated how, with a mere twist of the calibration knob, a breath test result could be adjusted from .01 % (when calibrated properly) to as high as .22 %. Based on this evidence, the judge dismissed the defendant’s case.  While great pains were taken to remedy the problem, there is still a possibility that the device you are tested on will give false readings.

In Tennessee, breath tests create a rebuttable presumption that you are intoxicated.  Essentially, the burden is on you to prove that you were not intoxicated.  Without assistance from a trained professional, this can be very difficult to do.  DUI convictions can ruin your life.  Do you drive for a living?  Do you have minor children who cannot take care of themselves?  Or is driving fundamental to your life in some other way?  If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you should understand that a DUI conviction might prevent you from fulfilling your responsibilities.  Not only will you have to incur the costs of the conviction (court costs, fees, insurance premiums), you will also have to bear the stigma of being labeled a drunk driver.

Procedures and machines differ from state to state, police department to police department.  The number of mistakes and errors that the police can make when preparing these devices is too numerous to list.  However, an absence of human error cannot render these tests reliable.  It suffices to say that, until we can ensure the machines are properly maintained and the tests are properly administered, this love affair between the police and their breath tests poisons our justice system and calls the validity of DUI convictions into question.  If you have been stopped, cited, or arrested for any DUI related offense, contact a DUI attorney.

The attorneys at the Oberman and Rice Law Firm are available to assist you 24 hours a day. For information on how to select a Tennessee DUI attorney, click here.  For information about a Tennessee DUI charge, you may contact Steve Oberman or Sara Compher-Rice at (865) 249-7200.

If a person submits to a blood, breath, or urine test and registers above .08% (the legal limit for Driving Under the Influence in Tennessee), not only could this test result help to convict the person of Driving Under the Influence or one of the more serious offenses noted above, but the submission may ultimately cost the same person an extra $250.00 in addition to mandatory fines and other court costs.

These increased out of pocket costs related to a Tennessee Driving Under the Influence (DUI) conviction, make it even more imperative that anyone charged with the offense of DUI in Tennessee contact a lawyer who regularly handles DUI cases and is familiar with the issues related to chemical testing.  If you have been charged with a DUI in Knoxville, Tennessee or elsewhere in the state of Tennessee, feel free to contact our office for more information by calling (865) 249-7200 or visit our website, www.tndui.com.