The People of the State of Colorado, Piaintiff-Appellant v. Jack Lee Schaufele — Eid, J., Dissenting

Summary

Justice Eid's dissent argues that the plurality misread the controlling portions of the Supreme Court's blood-draw decision and incorrectly treated a four-Justice discussion rejecting the Chief Justice's proposed guidance as binding precedent. In her view, the court was free to consider that guidance, and the warrantless blood draw was reasonable because probable cause arose late, obtaining a warrant would have taken substantially longer than drawing blood, and alcohol was dissipating. Justice Boatright, concurring in the judgment, would have affirmed on procedural grounds because the People raised their governing argument for the first time in a motion for reconsideration.