Legal landscape note: This article was originally published in 2014 and describes the law as it stood at that time. New Jersey law changes frequently.
Police took your blood after a DWI arrest, and no one ever showed you a warrant. For years that was routine in New Jersey, until the U.S. Supreme Court held in Missouri v. McNeely (2013) that police generally must obtain a search warrant before drawing blood from a suspected drunk driver. In December 2014, the New Jersey Supreme Court heard argument in State v. Adkins and State v. Verpent on whether McNeely applies retroactively to New Jersey cases arising before it was decided.
The two cases framed the issue well. Timothy Adkins was arrested in 2010 after his car struck a utility pole; two hours later, police obtained a blood sample at a hospital without his consent and without a warrant, revealing a blood-alcohol content of .157 percent. Kenneth Verpent was arrested in 2008 after a tow-truck collision; he passed a breath test but gave a urine sample -- demanded four hours after the arrest, without a warrant -- that tested positive for cocaine and marijuana. In both cases the Appellate Division upheld the tests, and both defense lawyers argued that the delays showed there was no exigency excusing the failure to get a warrant, while the State argued that police had followed the rules as they existed at the time.
Update -- how the case was decided: The New Jersey Supreme Court decided State v. Adkins at 221 N.J. 300 (2015). The Court held that McNeely applies retroactively on a "pipeline" basis -- that is, to cases that were still pending on direct appeal when McNeely was decided. In those cases, the existence of exigent circumstances excusing the lack of a warrant must be assessed under the totality of the circumstances, with the natural dissipation of alcohol in the blood treated as one relevant factor rather than a per se exigency. The practical rule going forward is clear: absent true exigency or valid consent, police need a warrant before compelling a blood draw in a DWI investigation.
Based on reporting by Michael Booth, New Jersey Law Journal, December 3, 2014.