32 CFR 634.38 - Involuntary extraction of bodily fluids in traffic cases.
(a) General. The procedures outlined in this section pertain only to the investigation of individuals stopped, apprehended, or cited on a military installation for any offense related to driving a motor vehicle and for whom probable cause exists to believe that such individual is intoxicated. Extractions of body fluids in furtherance of other kinds of investigations are governed by the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, Military Rule of Evidence 315 (2002) (MRE 315), and regulatory rules concerning requesting and granting authorizations for searches.
(2) Army and Marine Corps personnel should not undertake the nonconsensual extraction of body fluids for reasons other than a valid medical purpose without first obtaining the advice and concurrence of the installation staff judge advocate or his or her designee.
(b) Rule. Involuntary bodily fluid extraction must be based on valid search and seizure authorization. An individual subject to the UCMJ who does not consent to chemical testing, as described in § 634.37, may nonetheless be subjected to an involuntary extraction of bodily fluids, including blood and urine, only in accordance with the following procedures:
(1) An individual subject to the UCMJ who was driving a motor vehicle and suspected of being under the influence of an intoxicant may be subjected to a nonconsensual bodily fluid extraction to test for the presence of intoxicants only when there is a probable cause to believe that such an individual was driving or in control of a vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant.
(i) A search authorization by an appropriate commander or military magistrate obtained pursuant to MRE 315, is required prior to such nonconsensual extraction.
(ii) A search authorization is not required under such circumstances when there is a clear indication that evidence of intoxication will be found and there is reason to believe that the delay necessary to obtain a search authorization would result in the loss or destruction of the evidence sought.
(iii) Because warrantless searches are subject to close scrutiny by the courts, obtaining an authorization is highly preferable. Warrantless searches generally should be conducted only after coordination with the servicing staff judge advocate or legal officer, and attempts to obtain authorization from an appropriate official prove unsuccessful due to the unavailability of a commander or military magistrate.
(2) If authorization from the military magistrate or commander proves unsuccessful due to the unavailability of such officials, the commander of a medical facility is empowered by MRE 315, to authorize such extraction from an individual located in the facility at the time the authorization is sought.
(i) Before authorizing the involuntary extraction, the commander of the medical facility should, if circumstances permit, coordinate with the servicing staff judge advocate or legal officer.
(ii) The medical facility commander authorizing the extraction under MRE 315 need not be on duty as the attending physician at the facility where the extraction is to be performed and the actual extraction may be accomplished by other qualified medical personnel.
(iii) The authorizing official may consider his or her own observations of the individual in determining probable cause.
(c) Role of medical personnel. Authorization for the nonconsensual extraction of blood samples for evidentiary purposes by qualified medical personnel is independent of, and not limited by, provisions defining medical care, such as the provision for nonconsensual medical care pursuant to AR 600-20, section IV. Extraction of blood will be accomplished by qualified medical personnel. (See MRE 312(g)).
(1) In performing this duty, medical personnel are expected to use only that amount of force that is reasonable and necessary to administer the extraction.
(2) Any force necessary to overcome an individual's resistance to the extraction normally will be provided by law enforcement personnel or by personnel acting under orders from the member's unit commander.
(4) All law enforcement and medical personnel will keep in mind the possibility that the individual may require medical attention for possible disease or injury.
(d) Nonconsensual extractions of blood will be done in a manner that will not interfere with or delay proper medical attention. Medical personnel will determine the priority to be given involuntary blood extractions when other medical treatment is required.
(e) Use of Army medical treatment facilities and personnel for blood alcohol testing has no relevance to whether or not the suspect is eligible for military medical treatment. The medical effort in such instances is in support of a valid military mission (law enforcement), not related to providing medical treatment to an individual.
Title 32 published on 2013-07-01
no entries appear in the Federal Register after this date.