I have Intox Man x4, with the defendant flown to hospital where blood is drawn for medical purposes. Knowing about Martinez, we sent the trooper to the hospital with a search warrant to recover the blood. Affidavit and Warrant both specifically reference doing analysis on the blood; the warrant specifically says to take the blood to the DPS crime lab.

Defense Attorney is prepping a Motion to Suppress because there's no warrant to do the analysis. (He's also complaining that we got the black box by court order and not search warrant...)

I can't find this fact pattern in the mountain of cases like Crider. Here, the blood wasn't DRAWN pursuant to search warrant, but it was searched for and seized pursuant to a search warrant.

It seems pretty clear that the Courts don't expect a distinct warrant for analysis, and the fact that mine specifically mentions it, makes me think I'm ok.

Has anyone else run into this "warrant for step 2 and 3, but not step 1" fact pattern yet?

Check out Balderas from this week’s case summaries:

https://www.tdcaa.com/case-summaries/may-7-2021/