top of page

What happens if a driver refuses to give a sample of blood?

Writer's picture: Patrick HoranPatrick Horan

Updated: Jan 29

Drink driving prosecution dismissed.



A man who had been arrested for drink driving and who had refused to provide a specimen in the Garda Station had his case dismissed at Cavan District Court.

The court found that there had been a procedural defect in the prosecution case.


The case came before Judge Raymond Finnegan on 10 January. Mr FD was represented in court by David Staunton BL and Patrick Horan.


“Inspector” he said, “there is a problem”.

 

Garda DJ gave evidence that he was on duty on Thursday 2 May 2024 when at 12:30am he observed Mr FD’s vehicle “driving along Church Street, Kingscourt, [Cavan] in the direction of the Dublin Road”.


He noted that Mr FD’s car had “no lights on…was swerving…and [making] very wide turns”. Garda DJ activated both patrol car “lights and sirens”. 


Mr FD pulled in. Mr FD got out of his car and Garda DJ noted that Mr FD “walked towards me and was unsteady on his feet”. Mr FD identified himself to Garda DJ and gave his name and address.


Garda DJ noted that Mr FD “had a strong smell of intoxicating liquor coming from his breath and his speech was slurred”. He was the sole occupant of the car.


Garda DJ concluded that Mr FD was too intoxicated to drive, and at 00:35am he arrested him on suspicion of drink driving.


Mr FD was then placed in the patrol car and taken to Bailieboro Garda Station, arriving there at 12:47am.

He was given his rights, and a designated nurse was called for the purposes of taking blood or being provided with urine.


The nurse arrived at 1:08am.

 

Mr FD was taken to the doctor’s room at 1:11am and introduced to the nurse.

Garda DJ said:


“At 1:12am I made a requirement under section 12 (1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 2010 to provide the designated nurse with a specimen of his blood or at your option to provide a specimen of urine. A failure or refusal to comply was an offence…and on conviction you shall be liable to a fine not exceeding €5,000 and or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months. You shall be liable to a disqualification from driving for a term of 4 years if you fail or refuse to comply”.


Garda DJ said that he “explained the requirement and penalties several times”. 


Garda DJ said that “at 01:15 FD refused to provide a sample to the designated nurse”. 

He was then taken from the doctor’s room to the custody area and later charged for court.


If convicted Mr FD would have been disqualified from driving for 4 years.


__________


What is the penalty for a driver who refuses to give breath, blood or urine samples?

 

Barrister David Staunton then put questions to Garda DJ in cross-examination.  

He focused on the circumstances in the doctor’s room with Mr FD, the designated nurse and Garda DJ.


Mr Staunton referred to the statement that Garda DJ had prepared for the case.

“You said in your statement:


‘I am now requiring you to permit the designated nurse to take from you a specimen of your blood or at your option to provide [the nurse] with a specimen of your urine. If you fail or refuse to comply with this requirement you shall be guilty of an offence and on conviction you shall be liable to a fine not exceeding €5,000 and or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months. You shall be liable to a disqualification from driving for a term of 4 years if you fail or refuse to comply”.


Mr Staunton went on: “I explained this requirement and the penalties associated in plain English to [Mr FD] several times”. 

‘Is this correct’?


Garda DJ agreed: “Yes, in plain English, several times”.

 


At the conclusion of the State’s case Mr Staunton proceeded to make submissions to the court. He advanced legal arguments supported by case law as to why the State’s case against Mr FD should be dismissed.


When he had finished Judge Finnegan turned to the State.

“Inspector” he said, “there is a problem”.


The State did not disagree with Judge Finnegan.

 

Judge Finnegan agreed with the Defence argument.


He then addressed Mr FD directly and warned him that he had been very lucky today and that it would be unwise to appear before his court again.

Mr FD agreed with Judge Finnegan and thanked him.


Judge Finnegan dismissed the charge.



35 views0 comments

Comments


bottom of page