Okay, has anyone encountered defense counsel attacking arresting officer for not using THP-51 (and TRC 724 mandatory blood draws). Just wondering what the issue was. Got one today that probably should have used mandatory blood draw.

I've seen such a case, but I haven't seen it played out in court. I'm curious to see what happens, because it presents an interesting dilemma for the defense, doesn't it?

Q: "Officer, you were supposed to draw blood from my client against his will, weren't you? And that blood sample could prove his innocence, couldn't it?"
A: "Well, Mr. Defense Attorney, your client was supposed to voluntarily provide me with a specimen upon request, and he didn't do that. And that specimen could prove his guilt, couldn't it?"

We have not seen it in court yet - but there are 3 on deck where I am certain this will be a defense crutch. For some reason I don't foresee "because my sergeant didn't tell me this was the new law until November" as being very rehabilitative.