State of Arizona, Appellee v. Alfonso De Anda Iii, Appellant.

Summary

The court held that De Anda voluntarily consented to a warrantless blood draw despite being told that refusing the test would result in suspension of his driving privileges before he was asked whether he would submit. The advisement did not claim that officers could compel testing, and the sequence of the statements did not by itself make consent involuntary; voluntariness remained a totality-of-the-circumstances inquiry. The court affirmed the denial of suppression and the resulting convictions and sentences.