What is the value of diagnostic bronchoscopy in haemoptysis patients with a clear CT scan?

Mitchell, D.; Aujayeb, A.; Grover, Helen; Taylor, Lauren

doi:10.1016/s0169-5002(20)30053-2

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…25 The Mitchell plurality accurately describes policing drunk driving as a "vital public interest" on which laws and policies limiting permitted BAC on the roads have a significant impact. 26 This demands effective and admissible BAC testing, which the plurality-again, accurately-acknowledges requires blood draws when a suspect cannot give a breath sample. 27 Determining that this "compelling interest" creates a "compelling need" to blood test a DUI suspect who cannot provide a breath sample, the plurality declares a warrantless blood draw on an unconscious driver meets the first prong of McNeely.…”

Section: Mitchell V Wisconsinmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Needle and the Damage Done: Mitchell v. Wisconsin's Sweeping Rule for Warrantless Blood Draws on Unconscious DUI Suspects

Taxman¹

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a normal year, the annual death toll from drunk driving accidents in the United States will roughly equal the total number of victims of the September 11th terrorist attacks and service members killed in the War on Terror combined. 1 And while every state has enacted increasingly progressive laws to prevent and punish driving under the influence (DUI), 2 episodes of drunk driving remain consistent year to year and less than one percent of self-reported drunk drivers are arrested. 3 Drunken and drugged driving is, both in lay terms and legally speaking, 4 a compelling public issue. But the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution does not discriminate based on the social cost of specific criminal activity, or at least it ought not to. That is why the Supreme Court's 2019 plurality opinion in Mitchell v.

show abstract

Section: Mitchell V Wisconsinmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Needle and the Damage Done: Mitchell v. Wisconsin's Sweeping Rule for Warrantless Blood Draws on Unconscious DUI Suspects

Taxman¹

2020

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

What is the value of diagnostic bronchoscopy in haemoptysis patients with a clear CT scan?

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

The Needle and the Damage Done: Mitchell v. Wisconsin's Sweeping Rule for Warrantless Blood Draws on Unconscious DUI Suspects

The Needle and the Damage Done: Mitchell v. Wisconsin's Sweeping Rule for Warrantless Blood Draws on Unconscious DUI Suspects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About