Nebraska Revised Statute 60-6,200
Driving under influence of alcoholic liquor or drugs; chemical test; consent of person incapable of refusal not withdrawn.
Any person who is unconscious or who is otherwise in a condition rendering him or her incapable of refusal shall be deemed not to have withdrawn the consent provided by section 60-6,197 and the test may be given.
- Laws 1959, c. 168, § 3, p. 614;
- R.R.S.1943, § 39-727.05;
- R.S.1943, (1988), § 39-669.10;
- Laws 1993, LB 370, § 295.
Defendant found incapable of refusing taking of blood sample. Therefore, consent was implied under this statute. State v. Brittain, 212 Neb. 686, 325 N.W.2d 141 (1982).
A refusal to submit to a chemical test for alcohol occurs when the licensee after being asked to submit to a test so conducts himself as to justify a reasonable person in the requesting officer's position in believing that the licensee understood that he was asked to submit to a test and manifested an unwillingness to do so. Wohlgemuth v. Pearson, 204 Neb. 687, 285 N.W.2d 102 (1979).
To constitute a refusal to submit to a chemical test for alcohol requested under this section the only understanding required by the licensee is an understanding that he has been asked to take a test. Wohlgemuth v. Pearson, 204 Neb. 687, 285 N.W.2d 102 (1979).
Where a person is incapable of refusal by reason of injuries the same may be taken provided other conditions of section 39-669.08 (transferred to section 60-6,197) are met. Mackey v. Director of Motor Vehicles, 194 Neb. 707, 235 N.W.2d 394 (1975).
Blood may be drawn from an unconscious person only upon compliance with the requirements of statutes complimentary hereto. State v. Howard, 193 Neb. 45, 225 N.W.2d 391 (1975).
This section authorizes the taking of test for intoxication even when the defendant is unconscious. State v. Seager, 178 Neb. 51, 131 N.W.2d 676 (1964).
Drawing of blood sample by physician who had been directed to act as coroner's physician from body of fatally injured passenger in automobile did not violate prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, and result of tests performed by competent chemist using accepted procedures and facilities were admissible. Gardner v. Meyers, 491 F.2d 1184 (8th Cir. 1974).