Elliott v. Commonwealth – “Phlebotomists” need not be “licensed” in order to draw blood.
Virginia law mandates that, for a valid DUI blood test, that the blood be drawn by a physician, registered nurse, licensed practical nurse, phlebotomist, graduate laboratory technician or a technician or nurse designated by order of a circuit court acting upon the recommendation of a licensed physician. (Va Code sec. 18.2-268.5). In this case, the person who drew the defendant’s blood was an EMT/Paramedic, employed by the jail and a local hospital to draw blood and perform tasks of a phlebotomist. She was not a licensed phlebotomist.
The defedant objected to the evidence of the blood tests becasue the EMT was not a “phlebotomist.” The Court held that licensure as a phlebotomist is not a requirement in the law and that the EMT’s testimony was sufficent to make her a “phlebotomist” for the purposes of the prosecution. The blood evidence was admitted and Elliott was convicted.
Elliott also argued that he was seized improperly. While monitoring a congested intersection, the arresting officer witnessed Elliott swerve between lanes and abruptly stop at a point past the “stop bar.” He was also yelling and gesturing at nearby motorists. A nearby motorist appeared to be concerned by appellant’s behavior. The Court held that this was sufficent cause for the police officer to order Elliott to stop his casr and to begin an investigation.
The conviction was affirmed.