594
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Eonorablr Homer Garrtmon, Jr., Dlreotor
DeQtlrtment0r Pub110 saioty
Aurtin, ‘hrra
wore filed?
atuter, would it be
the defendant is
the influoneo oi in-
ent lr ia meeo r tha
#)rtmu o fthe d0r8nd-
ath torta, blood testo
en ouoh ohmgee won rlie6Ta
0r the Fwml Cod. 0r Tsxas, lB25, as
oon who drives or oper8tao 6n auto-
f other motor trhiolo upon any rtnet
or alloy or any other plaao wlthlathe limltr of..
any inoorporatsd oity, town,or village, or upon
an7 pub110 road or highway in thir 6tak while
mob person lr lntorloated, or in any degree under
the lnfluenor oi intorloating liquor, ahall upon oon-
dotion be oonfined in the prnitentiarY ior aab more
thantwo(8) pars, or be oonfined in the oounty
Honorabls Homer tirrlson, Jr., -go Z
4611 for not less than five (5) d6rs nor non
than nlnstr (90 days 6nd flnsd not less than
Nrty Dollsrs ( b50) nor mars than Five Rundrsd
Dollars (#500).n
The abovr 6rtlol8 was first inoorponted into
the statutes br ths Ao.ts ot the Seoond Called Session of
ths Thlrtf-eighthLdgisfature in 192s. (Aots 2nd 0.8.
1923, p. 56). It has been twioe 6mendsd, ones in 1925 at
ths First Called Session of the Fortpfourth. Lsgislaturs,
(lists 44th Leg. 1st C. 5.. p. 1654), and again br'ths Forty-
ritth ~gislaturs at it8~Rogular Sesalon in 1937~.(Aots 45th
~82. p. 105). ~'Howsvsr, ths amendments did little to ohange
the original dsrlnitlon Of the otis, b?ing prlnolpallr ds-
totod to ths psnaltr. nYosffort has been m6dr to presorlbs
6ly, dltreront rulr ot'srldenos with retsrsnoa to ths speoi-
ii0 offonas. or oourss, lt is alrap lnoambent on ths
St6t.s to provr bsmnd 6 rsaaonabls doubt that the ds?sndmt
was unbr the Inflasnos of intoxioatlng liquor 6t the tim
or the 6ii8gea orrense. Hlttson t. Stats, lS4 Tsx. Or. R.
181, 114 s. w. (2d) 881.
Ths question prssentsd br JOU lnvolvss a oonsid-
lr 6tlo nof srreralTaotots. In the first place, while the
courts will.go a long via7 in 6ds&ttiog,sxpsrt_tpstWo~,~ dr-
duoed from 8 w*ll~r*oognlred solentl?lo 'grinolple or as-
oorsq the thing from whioh the dsdaotlon 18 made must be
sai?io~entlj.*st*bllsh*d to her* pined general loo*ptano*
$pi,%ha partlouhr field in whloh it @elon&a: Ses.FrJs V.
Uriitid 8iites 295 Feb. 101s (DlstrlOt oi Colambia,~l92S
systollo blood pssure dsoeption test: held inadmlsslble f ;
State f. Rohdk, 210 air. .651, 246 H..W. S14, 86 A. 1. R.
611 (1935, Rl~,onsln court r ejeo ted lrldenoe obtained through
use or rcGoa'll6Cd *lie detestor*); %ople v. Forts, 279 N. I.
204, 18.X. Xc.(2d) Sl, 119 A.~ L. R. 1098 (lQS5, same hOldin
by I!IewYork Court of Ap~8618).
We also wish to point out that the Texas Court of
OrimMal Appshls has repsatedly,held that non-expert witnss88s
MJ t*stlSy as to intoxloation o? aoousod, in one ,oase quoting
with approval an expression of 6 Ponns~lran~a oourt that
~drunkenaess 18 oi suoh oommon oqourranoe that its reoogni-
tlon roqulres M peou.Mr 80icbntiri0 knowledgs.- Inn888 f.
Stats,'106 Tsx. Cr. R. 524, FOS s. w. 821, oiting Common-
m6lth t. mler, 217 Pa. 512, 66 A. 746,'10 Ann. Cas. 786,
11 Is. R. A. (I?.. 8.) 659. Sos 6180 'Jndsrhlll~s Grim. kr.
(Sd Rd.) 1 2783 Spears v. Stats, 20 6. F. (24) 1063; Rlddlo
v. State; 109 Tsx. Cr. R. 571, 298 s. K.-5803 Rood v..SfMs,
Honorabli Homer mrrl6on; Jr., Pap- S
106 Tsx. Cr. R. 492, 292 S. Vi. 1112; ‘Rallaos V. State, 100
Tax, Cr. Il.499, 2,?1 s. pi. 911, and p~anyothers.
In prossoutlons for driving a motor rihiols while
intoxloakd, or an&or the iniluenos of lntoxloating liquor,
it is 6pparsntly not svsn neoess6ry for the oourt in its
oh6rge to the jury to give 6nr asrinitlon 0s the terms *in-
toxloated or in anr degrss tidsr ths lnflosnos of lntoxloat-
ing 11 uors.* Lookhart T. stats, 102 Tsx. Cr. R. 599; 1
P24) 894; Stewart v. State, 108 Tsx. Or. R. 199, 299
:: :: 646.
ws, thersfors, express the opinion that 8ln00 the
courts have taken oog!iiranos of the sxlstenos of non-teohnloal,
wll rsoognlsed and rsadlly available means of establlahing
~lntoxloatlon, it wuld be aeoeasary for the state to show the
effioienoy of the SOientiflo methods ussd and the dopenda-
bllity of the results rssohsd bosom the admission or the
evldenoe.
However, if we oonosds t&t ths tssts rou amntion
are of suoh soisntitio standing and ~011 rooognlsad aa would
render sxpsrt op$nion as to ths rssult thereof oomipetent
evldenoe, it would 6ppear that if a psrson voluntarily per-
mitted the taking of spsolmsna or breath, blood or. urine for
suoh .tests,~ tbs. result thersor wuld be admissi~la in eol-
dsnoe against him. we quote from Herzog, mdloal Jurispru-
dsnos, I 48S, p. 955;
,.aAooused*s right not to be oompslled to be a
witnsss 6gainst hlmsslf by 6 sompulsory sxhibl-
tion or ixamlrmtloa or his bodr stay be walwd
by his sxpre’ss or ImplIed.oonsent.whsrs posl-
tire oonssat 1s 'shown,the mare taot that aooussd
was in ousto&J when examined would clear17 not
prsvsgt 6d&#sion of svldenos’ of sash sxamlnatton.
Whsrs 6 defendant Voluntarily submits to
ihi~ &aalnatlon, soms oourts hold that he thsre-
by walres hls right to objeot thersto. . . .-
A footnote refers to the Texas 0686 0s Cords8 v.
Stats, 54 Tax. Cr. 8. 204, 112 S. W. 945. In that 0880
it was hold that on tri61 of 6 woman for lxUantlolde, whhsrs
she oonssntedto 6 physls61 examination durlng.her lnoar-
osration after being advlsed by ths p~lolan that ha v&i&d
not .x&s her without her odnssnt, ths physlolan~s testlr~
monj of.her oondition was admissible. we hare no doubt of
the atilllty of the dsfsndant to waive a4 prlrilegs lnoldsnt
to ths use of luf& stldsnos 6s sug@sted in your Inquiry.
Ronorable Homer 06rr180n,Jr., P8ge 4
we next consldsr whether 6 personmight be oom-
pell.4 to mubdt_ to the taking_0s _ speolplsns 0s breath, blood,
or urina for the purposs 01 maVIng s01sntlfi0tests to de-
tSrmin8 whether such person ~88 lntoxloatsd or under the
influeS 0s lntoxlo6ting liquors. In ths 00ur88 0s oar ln-
tsstigation of this problem, ws have been rurnlshed an abls
oplnlon writtsn in Jimu6rf of thl8 Tear br ths Honor6bls
John R. C6ssld~, AttOrnsy tienor 0s the stat0 0-t Illlnols,
in responss~to 6n inquiry by 6 proseouM.ng 6ttornef of that
state, whether 6 OoronSr or othsr of?lOer wonl.4 bare the
right to t6ke 6 maple of the blood of the personsusing
8 death, .ror ths purpose of havlng'the blood 8nalyS8d tom
d&ermine whether or not suoh psrson was intoxicated at the
time the de6th was oaused. No soknowledge our appmolation
to Xr. c6881d~ for 6 oopy 0s his opinion, *mm which we take
the liberty to quote 6% length:
. . It 1s sseentlal to the protection
of the*piblio 8nd the preventionor orlme that
police offioersand law snforoingegenoies Sn-
gaged in ths Investigation 6nd deteotion of orims
be permitted to Sv.811 themselves of all reason-
SblS msns to rooompllsh the parpo&Sa for whloh
they sxist. On the other hand, every oitizen
is entltlad to oertalnrights, liberties and fra-
aunitles .whloh by their nature 6nd by oonatltu-
Mona1 guilanntee tmnsoend all others.
wSsotlon6, 0s Art1016 II, Illlnoir Con-
stitution, 1870. provides:
"Ths ‘right of the people to be’seoure in
their parsons, houses, p6prs and effeOt8, against
un.reasonSble searohS and sslturss shall not be
rlolatod; . . .’
Veotion 10 proiidss:
~Wo’person shall be oampelled to give evl-
demos againsthlnSS~f, . . .*
"The restriotlons on aethods of pollee in-
vestigation Sre but oomplomentary to the right8
of eve- oltlnn 8s guarpntsed under the above
quoted prodsions of ths RI11 of ilights. By the
rev nature 0s thsir 0rri008, ooroners,:sherlffs,
and p01100 ~offloials..gener~ll~ 6rS ohar@d with
th8 dlrtf not OX&YOR enidr0iSg ,thS i6W~-bUt~SiSO
or-obeying the sa+ +d honoring the aotistifu-.
tfonal gueianteSs appli0abls to all oltixenrr,
Ronorabls Homer Darrlson, Jr., Page 6
the aooused 68 well 68 the lnuooent.*
Rsterenoe 1s mad@ to 6 dlsousalonor oorrespond-
lng guarantees of the pederal Constitution br the United
Stat08 Supreme Court in the ease Of,Co$od t. 0. s., 255
U. 6. 298, 41 Sup. Ct; 261, 65 L. Ed. 64V, 6nd Itr. Cassidy
quotes from that 068s:
.T3is fourth amendmsnt reads:
*'The right of the psopls to be saouri in
their persons, houses, pepan and l ffso tsa,g a inet
unreasonabls searohes and ssicures,shall not be
violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon
probable- 06us0, supported br oath or affirmation,
and partioularlydeaoribing the plaos to be searoh-
ed, and the psrsons and things to bs ssdz.sd.*
'The part of the fifth 6nendment here In-
volved reads:
-‘Ho person . . . shall be oompelled in any
orlminal 0680 to be a witness against hImself.*
*It woald not be posslb~s to 644 to the
emphasis with whioh the framsrs of oar Constf-
tutlon and this oourt (in Boy4 Y. U. S. 116 0.
S. 616, in weelm v. 0. s., 232'U. S. 985, and
In SIlverthornsLambor Co. f. U. S., 251 U.S.
286) hare deolaredthe lmport6noe to politloal
libsrty ma to ths wlfmre 0s our oountz70s
the duo obsenanos of the right8 guarMte8d
undsr the Constltatlon by these two amendusnts.
Ab elrr0ot 0s the aeoisions 0it0a ia8 That suoh
rights 6rs dsolared to bs lnals~nsablo to the
**ai snjbyiwnt 0s~ personal seourity, psnon6l
liberty and private propcrty*i th6t they are to
be regardedas of the very ssssnoeof .oonstlta-
tlonal liberty; and that the guarantee of them
is as Important and 6s lmperatlts so an ths
gu6ranters0s the.other fundamentat rights 0s
the lndl~ldual oltizen, - the ,right to trip1 by
jury, to the writ of Habeas oorpus 6nd:to due
prooess0s law. It has boon r8psatedl~ deolded
that thess amendments should reosive a.llbsral
oonstruotlon, so asto preventstealth enoroach-
mont of~the home, or gradual dspr8016tlOn' Of the
rights seoursd by them; by hpsroeptibl~. prao-
tl&e or oourts or.br well-lntentloned but als-
krksn.ly o+erse~&ous exeoutire orrioers.=
Honorable Homer Darrison, Jr., Page 6
our own Bill of Rights (Constltntlon of Texas,
Art. I, Seotlons i, and lo), oontalns almost ldsntloal lan-
guage to thr Illinois and United States Constltutlons.
Y;it.h respect to the security of persons,~howerer,
it is to'be hoted.that the rights scoured by the Federal
Constltutlon 6nd the Texas Co~stltutfon, supr6;does not
prohibit all soarohes and seizuresbut extends only to those
consldsred,unreasonabls. l.ClersY. State, 156 Tex. Cr. R.
475;lEB s. B. (24) 484; xoore 7. Adams, (Cir. App.) ,91
S. WI (2d) 447. Ordinarily a lawful arrest oarrles with
It the right to searoh for weapons, any article whloh might
aid or faollit6t8 eso8ps, establish identiflcatlon or which'
appear to be fruits of the crime. 5 C. J. 434, i 74, 38 Tex.
Jur. 93, 1 60, Eelton Y. State .llO Tex. Cr. R. 439, 10 S.
8. (24) 3843 Rayes v. State, li5 Tex. cr. R. 644, 28 s. W.
(24) 556.3 Agnello v. U. S., 269 U. S. 20, 46,Sup. Ct. 4, 70
L. Rd. 145, 51 A. L. R. 409.
We have-found no oase wherein our Court of Crimln-
.a1 Appeals has had for consideration whether a foroed physl-
sal examination wou(16 violate the oonstltutlonal prohlbitlon
against unreasonable searohes and seleures. But In olvil
oases the appellate ooufts have paseed upon the questlon in
several instanoes. Texas Fimployers Ins..Ass'n. Y. Downing,
(Cit. App., writ refused) 218 9. W. 112; A. k &. K:;:Ry. Co.
7. Cluok, 99 'fox. 192, 77 3:X. 403, 64 L. R. A. 404, 104
Am. St. RFQ. 863, 1 Ann. Can. 261; Gulf C. h C. F. Ry. CO.
Y. Bukher,-83 Tex. 309, 18 S. W. 583; 120. Pao. Railway Corn-
pany Y. Johnson, 72 Tex. 95, 10 S. R. 325; I. & 0. E. Ry. Co.
Y; Underwood, 64 Tex. 463.
In the earlier oases the courts expressrddoubt
whether or not an or&or of the oourt to oompel 6 plaintiff
in a personal injury suit to submit to 6n exaninatlon by a
physlolan violated the oonstltutlonal guaranty against un-
reasonable searoh and seizure, but in the'oase of Ry. co. Y.
Cluok, supra, the Supreme Court in 6n opinion by Justloe
Brown held that neither the oomon lar, nor .tbe statutes of
this State .authorired suoh an examination, ad in the ab-
senoe of speolflo leglslatlve sanotlon, the examination was
unwarranted. we quote from the opinion:
%Sinoe the oomaon law furnishes no preoe-
dent for such proooeding, we must look to our
Cotitltution.and statutes .ror authority In our
caettstoorder ~the examination. The proriaions
o? our Constltatlon and of our statates with ro-
gard to the'praotlae and jor4-dlotion of oourts
Honorable Homer Garrison, Jr., page 7
4~8 4nt4g0418tio t0 the spirit 4uu purp088 0r
suoh prooeedlngs. TO make 8uTe of the lmnunl$y
of the person of citizens from improper later-
ferenee by 4ay authority, the oonrentlon whloh
rramed our Coaatltatlon addpted 4s a part of
the 8111 of Rlghtr this aeotion 9 of art1018 18
W*The'people ahall be aaoare ln their per-
sons, hoasis, paperr and posseesloos from all
unreasonable aelxures or 884rChes. and no war-
. rant to eeemh an7 place or to'selze any person
or thing shall leeuo without 68aCrlbing then: aa
near 48, m4y be, nor without probable dause sup-
ported by oath.or afflnnatlon.* ?Yhether, under
this guaranty of immunity from lnterfereaoe with
the person, the leglelature Ei&ht authorize the
physioal bxadnetion 0r 4 party to 4 euit, 1s
not berore a8 Sor detertinatlon, but we 4re or
the opinion that our Conrtitutlon 68oures every
citizen or thls State 4 ainst any 88lzure or
aearoh of his person whf ah 1~ not plainly au-
thorlzed by some 'law or this State.
". . .
'The oommoa law proceeding most analogotis
to physloa& examination 18 the right of rlew,
W M+lch.t party-sought to @ye ~II wltneslrer
.ex4mlne the premlaea to qUallQ them to teetlfy.
*There are but two such 44444 rdported in the
English Reports. Newnan v. Tate, 1 Arnold, 244,
am3 Turquand f. Strand Union, 8 Bowling, 201.9
The .request wae refused In both 0488s. 'milwap
co. t. Botsrord (141 u. s. 250). It 1s t3i~nlri-
oant that the legislature oi this rtate artor
a&ptlag the oommon law of Itngl4nd, wltbla 4
short time after those oases were deolded, re-
pealed the right of view by this artlole, 1451,
Revised Statutea. 'All vouchers, vlewa, eemolna,
and 4180 trlale bJ wager of battle and. negar or
law, shall stand repealed.* Thus we me8 that
the leglelature has not only failed to provide
tor 4 phyeloal examlnatlon of partlee, but has
aotually repealed from the aommoa law in thle
state thr~odly proceedings that bore the allght-
est refmcbY.enc8 to it.
”
. . .
*'lt is the provlaoe of a oourt to try issaer
rormd by the pleadinga OS parties aooordlng to
60:
Honorable Homer aarrlson, Jr., P4ge 8
the rril88 Of prOO8dtW8, t0 furnish411prOOeS4
4uthOriZ8d by 14W t0 88Ollr8 8fld8nO8, Md t0 4d-
minister $u.tioe 4ooordlag to thq .erldenoe ad-
duo86 on the trial. The oommon law and 0a.k 4t4t-
at88 provide 411 of th8 me4aS whloh marts 4re
sathorlsedta use in the 4dminlstratloa 0s Jas-
tloe between parties, 4ad no court ha4 4uthority
to orlgln4te 4ad latroduoe 4 new pro0886 to ea-
able p4rti88 t0 88OUr8 8Vid8408,i4 SUppOrt Of
their 04888: A OOurt with power to Q4k8 anbeer-
rleat to Its order 4ll persons and things that
Will afford the MSt r8114bl8 e7ld8aO8 rwoald
b8 an 4aO1Mlr in OOaStlttltlOa4l r8pRbllO4a gov-
lr a m0a. t It 18 bsttsrfor the oomwn good that
a oourt should be restrained wlthla prescribed
limits, than that judges be fnV88t8d with ua-
liSlit8d 4ad irreS~nSibl8 QoW8r4 OT8r the per-
soas 4n4 property 0s the 8ltlZ8a.
a*In this state br our Constltutloaaad
the common law the person 0s 4 oltlzen 16 80
rraorrd that 4a OffiO8r a47 not disregard the
right 0s p8rsoa4l fr88dOIk. efea to satisfy 4n
8X8OUtlOa by 18vfng Upon prOp8rty whloh 18 up’
on the person 0s the defendant. . . .* n
whl18 the coar88810n 0s 4 d8f8nd4nt-smy .m 468d
in 8~id8nO84fJ4inSth5m if made without 6OmpdLSiOilOr per-
wasion uaaer 6t4tUtOv rules d8Sig44t8d to 84f8gu4rd. his
rights (Arts. 726, 727, Code Cr. Pme. 1925), aooordlng to
Branah's hmot4ted P8441 COd8, p. 32, 1 69, the 8t4tat8
18 not ibit8d to actual verb41 or written aokaowledge-
meat 0r~gtlilt. Fe quote;
"The statuke relatlagto 00ni888$.0&3 18
not ooafinedto 4 teohnloal 00af8881oa, but
oofer~ anyrot in the nature 0s 4 00nf88810n,
statement or olroumstaace done or made bf de-
f8ad4at while la eoaflaement or custody, and
not having been properly warned, whloh m4)- be
008d by the Stat8 as 4 orlmlaatlre fact against
hh.=
The 8tatemeat Of the t8Xt has b88a 8Xpr88817 4p-
prored by the COuCt Of Cri.miMl Appeals. KeLUii404 7. State,
97 Tex. Cr. R. 154, ?bO S. W. 174. In that 44S8, ia 4 for-
gery pros8outlon, the oouaty attorney oaawd the defendant,
rhu8 uader arrest, to be brought to his 0rri08 and had him
write oertaln words, his owa mm8 and other writing without
60:
Honorable Homer CarriEOn, Jr., Pug8 9
warniag 48 t0 it8 W8. It was held that 4dml4slonof the
papor with the Writing thereOa, 48 4 standard0s oomparlsoa
~48 r8~8rSlbl8 error, being TiOl4tiV8 Of the pr888llt Arti-
0188 726 4ad 7g7, CO68 Cr. Proo. 1925. See 4180 Bratton
f. State, 102 T8x. Cr. R. 181, 277 S. W. 337, Click v. State,
119 T8x. Cr. R. 118, 44 s. vi. (2d) 992.
Th8 Texas ooastltutlonal ptovlsloa that no per-
son 4OCPS8d 0s 4 crlmlaal Off8aS8~shall be OOlrp8118dto
giV8 lncrlalnat*g 0r1d0n00 has been held to proteot one
rroa belag r8qUlr8d to prUdUO8 private papers whloh 4r8
i.aorlnin4tlag; Wilson v. State, 4l T8x. Crini. R. 115, 51
k K&16, If8r8dlth t. State, 73 Tex. Cr. Ri 147,,164 s.
. .
Ia a proseoutlon for assaalt with Intent to rap8
la which d8f8ad4at Oi4iiU8d to hav8‘h.46 frSqU8nt lateroouree
with pros8ontrir prior to the alleged a8b4ult, the trial
oourt r8fUS8d to require proseoutrlx to be 8X4DhI8d by phy-
SlOl4aS 4ppOlat8d by th8 0OUl-t to 4so8rtaln whether She had
186 4 VirtUOUS lif8. The court 0s Criminal Appeals d8014r8d
the Stilag Of the lower OOUJFtto be 4 proper One. Rettlg
f. Stat8 90 Tex. Cr. R. 142, 253 s. W. 839. Llk8wls8, in
pros8out~oas ~ror slander 'inusing language imputing want
0s ohaatit7 to the proseautrlx, wh8r8 d8f8nd4atS urged a
m8diO41 8ran;ia4tlOa~tO show whether the iEiputS$lOaS were
trae or f4188. Whlteh84d 1. State, 39 T8x. Cr. 8; 89, 45
Se W. 10; Bower8 1. State, 45 T8x. Cr. R. 185, 75 S. H. 299.
In 0111 search for pr808d8at8, it appears the
hx48 oourts hei78 never been oalled upon to s4actlon 4 ror-
oible inv4sloa 0s the body 0s a parson Ob4rg8d with 4 orlme.
w8 hare, th8r8fOr8, iOOk8d t0 Other fUriSdiCtiOn8.
III the 0448 Of W=& V. Oriffin, 18s fOW8 243,
170 8. W. 400, 2 A. L. R. 1327, petitioner who had been
OOtitt8d to Custody Of the sheriff br Order Of the health
authOrltl88, for the purpose Of subj8otlng him to 4 physl-
041 8x4mlaatloa 4nd blood test8 to d8t8tia8 whether or
ItOt he W4S '4ff8Ot86 with 4 *8n8re41 dlB6488 SOUght T8li8f
through 4 tirlt of habeas oorpus+
The oontentioa of respondent was that authority
for the prOpOS8d blood test 8XiSt8d la rd8S Of the Stat8
Board 0s Health. b’8 qUOt8 from the OpiniOll SUSt4iT.king the
writ end rsleasiag the petltloner:
*This petitloner may be.4 bag man, but we
hare no right to 4SSup16suah .4 f48l iOr the pur-
poS8 Of mbifmiziaghi8 O14i.mto prdt8OtfOnOf
HOnOr4ble Homer G4rrlsoa, Jr., P4gs 10
the ordln4v rights of person, which law and
the US4g86 Of CiVili 1lf8 r8g4rd 48 84Or8d
until loot or fOrf8ft86by au8 o~arlotlon 0s
crla8. Even whoa charg8d with the gtay86t of
OriQ88, he 04aaOt be ~OSQ8ii8d t0 &ire 8yId8aC8
against hmelf, nor 04n the Stat8 ooap81 hir
to 6abElt to 4 08dlO41 or surglo41 l x4sila4tlon,
the r0*uit 0s whloh MY teaa to oonylct him
Of 4'pabllo Off8nS8. (Stat8 '1. Height, 117 10~4
650, 69 L. R. A. 457, 94 Am. St. Rep. 323, 91
N. u. 935); 4nd, if th6re be any good~r8ason
why the s4iu8 Obj8OtlOa6 4r8 aOt ayal14b18 la
a prOO88dlag which may 6Ubj8Ot him t0 lgaomln-
lous r86tr4lat and pub118 06tra018m, it la, at
least a mare 4ad eelatarr propoaltlon to hold
that, before the court will aphola such 411 8X-
erClS8 0s power it must be authorlzsd by 4
clear 4~4~68fin~t8 8xpr888i0n 0s the 18glS14-
tit8 Will. This we a0 not h4Y8, -6 , la oar
jua~at,.the reatr4lnt0s the~petltbner, not
4s a diS4488d person whose detention in,4 sep-
4r4t8 hOUS Or hOSpit 46 th8 6t4tut8 author-
1688, but 801817 4s a suspeot and for the avow-
8d p~pO68 Of fOrOiKtg th8 8XpO6Ur8 Of hi8 bOd7
t0 YiSU41 8X4IlIl04tlOn, 4ad COmp811ing the 8X-
tr4otlon 0s blood tmm his veins in iearoh air
8vid8aO8 Of 4 1O4thSOm8 dIS8488, whloh WQ Or
mar not 8Xl6t, IS 4 de;prlyatloa 0s his llbert~
wlthoat dU8 prOO888 Of i4W, Md h8 IS 8atitl86
t0 be 68t fr88.”
Ia Peoplo T. EoCoy;45 Han.,Pr40. 216 (N. I. sup.
Ct.) 4 oompulso~ phyrlca1 examination 0s a rma prl6oa-
or charged with the mUrd8r 0s her 0hiid, p8rfOn!i86 Uad8r
order 0s 4 ooroner for th8 parpoor 0s 8st4bllsblag that the
48OUS8d had been reoently pregnant ~48 held a rlol4tlon0s
the coastItatlonal proyisfon ag4lDst 881f incrimin4tioh ma
testlmoa~ as~to the result 0s suoh an examination ~48 dsaled
4bmiSSiO4 bIt0 8Yid8nO8. The pertin8nt pOrtionOf the opla-
iOn r84dS 48 fOuOWSI
.The torolble 0x4mia4t10n 0s the prisoner
br the physlolan for the ~~88 of obtaining
8yld8aO8 that she had b88a pCUgIi4at, 4ad had
been 68iiY8IWd Of 4 Ohiid Wlthla tW0 Or thr88
weeks preyloar to the time 0s such ex4mIaatloa,
~48 ln ylol4tlon 0s the spirit and meaning 0s
the Coastltutlon, whloh d8C14rBS that 'a0 per-
SO@sh4llb8 0CUIQ81186 la qr Ori&iil41 0468 t0
be a'wltness-&galnst himS81f.' They Qlght 48
we11 here horn the prlsoaer, =a OOSQ8ll8d her,
Honorable Hogsr O4rrlsOa, Jr., P4ge 11
br thr8at8, t0 t8StifY that Sh8 h4d b484 pro&
a4at Md b88Il 68iiY8r86 Of the Ohild, 46 t0 ha78
OOmp8118dher? by tar84t8, t0 here 411Owed them
to look lato her person, with the.414 of 4 S&380-
ultun, to 4808rt4in whether She h&B&been prega4nt
4nd b884 r8084tir d8ilY8r8d Of 4 Ohud. . . .a
See 4180 Poop18 7. AikeM, 25 Callf. App. 272,
XO&4INlS y.Commonwealth, 264 mw 240, 94 S.^'!J.-(2d)
609, People Y. Corder, 244 Xloh. 274, 21 N. w. 309, People
7. Curran, 286 Ill. 302, 121 8. E. 657.
%8 4x8 lkOt rrnmiadftd Of the, 1la8 Of 04888 in this
Stat8 4nd SOM other jUdSdiOtiOll Wherein it has beeli held
not in rlolatlon 0s the constltutlon4l prltllegs to 00~~81
4 oomparlson 0s r00t prints, take finger prints or to seize
4rtiOl88 Of OlOthing Of a p8r4Oa Mdbr 4rr8St iOr id8ntifi-
cation, bat ln such 1n*t4a00* there la no fOrC8fdl lnraelon
0s the body ltse1f, for the purpose 0s proauoing 8Yld8ntl4~
r40t8.
Thor8 18, 0s coarse, no dlsposltloa to quarrel
wlth SOl8nO8. The tW8ati8th century 1s essentla11y an 828
0s sol8ntlflo 4dTaaO8m8nt. And while new solentlflc diS-
COY8rl88 ia4y 4t tlm88 furhlsh proof 0s error in 4 8p30iri0
14W, h8r8tOfOlB 4008pt86, it l8 aCY8r the pPrpOS8 Or ln-
t8lltiOli Of SCi8lkO8 t0 X8fut8 the 14W. It has be80 the 4ti
and the go41 Of 6Ol8nO8 t0 benefit humanity, c6- &ijfj lu-
Or84686 OOdOrtS t0 11f8 4ad tO'OUX'8husztn 1118. ~‘blt SOl8aO8
h46 b88n iaexorab~~ OppOS8d to the restrlotlon 0s fUad4Si8at4i
humsn iif6 and llbert~. On th8 OOntr4ryT, ~lt8 'primary eonoern
ha8 b88n ill behalf Of 4 mOr8 8Xp4nSlY8 fr68dOSL in 8OOnOSll0,
800141 aad polltloal lnt8roours8.
On the other hand, the law has W8100~86 6Oi8aC8 48
4 mOSt v4lu4bl8 iMtrUUl8at t0 be. U68d in the’ prOQti&4tiOa Of
jUStiO8. Not onlr has the 14W been liberal la it8 4ttltude
tomrd SOi8L108, but it h48, by frapliOatiOli 4t 184St, oham-
piOn the prlnolple 0s fr86dOSI 0s r8s84roh.
Thor8 ShOtid a878r be, liOr Shorild 4ay aeO86Slty
arise 4 parting Of the W4yS b8tW88ll 14W -6 SOi8nO8.
for,
sOi8aO8 18 pr8diO4tSd Oa 08rt4in ifIWt4bl8 14WS Of a4tUr8.
Law l8 ~b4886 upon Oert4i.a ia41ieMble~htle4a rights. AI¶d
although the two 8~@te r8Spi3OtiY81~ from the88 88p4I'4t8
8ouro88, ther oonstltute ln reality not a dO4li8m but an
original uult.
It must be rewmb8r84; hOmYer, that the bee10
~prOb18m Of OlTl1ivltlOa has ~8701786 4X-OPadthe StI'U~~l8
0s m4n to obtain Jnaste~ over MturS; hd Otif ia th8 de-
gree that suoh mastery he6 been attained ha6 Olyl1itatlC'c
Eonorable Honor Garrison, Jr., Page 12
pr0gr0s*0d. Solencehas 4id8d in the struggle, but SCi8llC8
ha6 been the agent, not the instigator. And there 16 no
more lnalieaable hmsn right than that-ofsanctityot the
person. Morally thls axiom Is older than either law or
SCi8LW8. Legally It 1s the baa10 fouadatlon of the Federal
and Stat8 Constitutions under whloh this deaocraoy operates.
It la our opinionth4t under our present constl-
tutlonal and statutory provisions It Is not pershu3ible for
the State to present eyideLkC8 of the mOWIt Of alcohol in
the system of a defendant charged with dr1yi.q a motor ve-
hicle while Under the lUf~U8nO8 Of 1ntOXiCating 1fqUOT a6
determined by breath tests, blood tests, end urine teats
made by or at the instance of the officers where'there 1s
an lnvaslon ot the body 3r person to obtain the specinen,
unless the said defondant waives his privilege.
Truoting that the above satisiactorllp ansxera
your lnqulry,~8 are
Yours very truly
lkmjamln woodall
ASSiSteSit
APPROVEDAPR26, 1940
g6L4dA*u
ATTORNEY GENEFUL OF TEXAP