United States v. Daniel G. Chapel

We granted en banc review of this case to consider whether to overrule our decision in United States v. Harvey, 701 F.2d 800, 803-04 (9th Cir.1983), which held that the Fourth Amendment requires that authorities arrest a suspect prior to a non-eonsen-sual taking of a sample of the suspect s blood without a warrant. In the case we review, a three-judge panel reversed Daniel Chapel’s conviction for drunken driving in violation of 36 C.F.R. § 4.23 (a)(2), after concluding that park rangers violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they seized a blood sample later used in evidence against him. United States v. Chapel, 34 F.3d 893 (9th Cir.1994). The panel recognized that, under Harvey , the failure of the rangers to arrest Chapel before or shortly after obtaining the blood sample rendered the seizure unreasonable. Id. at 894 .

Having considered the question anew, we conclude that the Fourth Amendment does not require the arrest of a suspect in order for law enforcement officers to cause the taking of a sample of the suspect’s blood without consent or a warrant. We therefore overrule Harvey . We vacate the panel’s decision and remand the case to the panel for a determination whether…