The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Monday, April 25, 1966
Decision: Monday, June 20, 1966
Issues: Criminal Procedure, Self-Incrimination

Advocates

Edward L. Davenport (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Thomas M. McGurrin (Argued the cause for the petitioner)

Facts of the Case

Schmerber had been arrested for drunk driving while receiving treatment for injuries in a hospital. During his treatment, a police officer ordered a doctor to take a blood sample which indicated that Schmerber had been drunk while driving. The blood test was introduced as evidence in court and Schmerber was convicted.

Question

Did the blood test violate the Fifth Amendment guarantee against self-incrimination?

Conclusion

No. Justice Brennan argued for a unanimous Court that the protection against self-incrimination applied specifically to compelled communications or testimony. Since the results of the blood test were neither "testimony nor evidence relating to some communicative act or writing by the petitioner, it was not inadmissible on privilege grounds."

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 5 votes for California, 4 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Due Process
Wrote a dissent
Warren
Wrote a dissent
Black
Wrote a dissent, joined Black's dissent
Douglas
Voted with the majority
Clark
Wrote a regular concurrence
Harlan
Wrote the majority opinion
Brennan
Voted with the majority, joined Harlan's concurrence
Stewart
Voted with the majority
White
Wrote a dissent
Fortas
Full Opinion by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1960-1969/1965/1965_658/>
(last visited ).