Advertisement

Police Arrest The Defendant And Hold Her Down While She’s Catheterized NonetheLess No State Action

Police Arrest The Defendant And Hold Her Down While She’s Catheterized NonetheLess No State Action People v. Sykes, 2017 IL App (1st) 150023 (December). Episode 439 (Duration 9:13)



Cops help hold her down while they force catheterize her, was this an illegal seizure after they captured and tested her urine?



Gist Ladina Sykes and her two children were leaving a beach in Evanston when their car struck a wall in the parking lot. At the hospital they hold her down to take her urine. She was found guilty and placed on supervision after cannabis was detected in her urine.



Sykes was deemed mentally unable to provide consent, so when she refused to provide a doctor-ordered urine sample, a nurse catheterized her while several people, including two Evanston police officers, held her down because she was being physically uncooperative.



Facts Paramedics took Sykes to Evanston Hospital.



The paramedics took Sykes to Evanston Hospital, where a triage nurse assessed her condition. She was stable and had no complaints but was deemed to have an altered mental state because even though she was alert and oriented as to person and place, she did not know the date or time of day.



Officer Pratt told hospital staff he suspected Sykes was under the influence of something. Pratt was standing outside Sykes’s room when he heard her tell the nurse she had one alcoholic drink that evening. He went in her room and asked her if she had been drinking. She told Pratt she had not been drinking or taking any drugs.



Pratt arrested her for driving under the influence, based on the odor of alcohol, slurred speech, bloodshot eyes, and overall demeanor.



Pratt asked Sykes to provide blood and urine samples, and she declined. He did not ask hospital staff to obtain samples for him.



The Hold Down Dr. Patel examined Sykes and ordered a CT scan and blood and urine tests to determine why Sykes was in an altered mental state and to decide on a proper course of treatment. The urine test, in particular, would determine if she had drugs in her system. Colleen Costello, the supervising nurse, asked Sykes for a urine sample. Sykes refused. Costello then decided to catheterize her. Costello said patients can refuse treatment unless, like Sykes, they have an altered mental state. When Costello began the catheter procedure, Sykes was combative, swinging her arms, kicking her legs, and moving her hips to resist catheterization. She also tried to get out of the bed. Costello called for assistance, and about nine people responded, including Evanston police officers Pratt and Magnas, who had been standing outside the room.



Pratt and Magnas stood at the head of the bed and held Sykes down by her shoulders. Once Sykes was restrained, Costello extracted the urine with a catheter.



The blood and urine tests were sent to the hospital lab. Sykes’s blood test showed she was well within the legal limit for alcohol, and her urine test was presumptively positive for cannabis and PCP.



After Sykes’s CT scan showed no evidence of injury and her mental state improved, Evanston Hospital discharged her into police custody.



Issue Sykes contends her conviction should be vacated because the police violated her fourth amendment rights by holding her down while a nurse forcibly catheterized her.



Sykes argued the Evanston police officers’ participation in the forcible extraction of her blood and urine to test for drugs or alcohol, without a warrant, was an illegal search and the results of the search should be suppressed.



Sykes first contends the police violated her fourth amendment rights by actively participating in her forced catheterization. While Sykes concedes the police did not order the catheterization, she asserts they participated in an unconstitutional search by helping to hold her down while a nurse catheterized her. She contends that because the police did not have a warrant and no exceptions to the warrant requirement exist, the results of the urine test should have been suppressed.



Fourth Amendment The fourth amendment applies only to government action.



A search performed by a private person does not violate the fourth amendment. Additionally, the fourth amendment does not prohibit the government from using information discovered by a private search. The State argues the catheterization was ordered and conducted by private actors, namely Dr. Patel and nurse Costello, respectively.



This Was Purely A Medical Procedure The State asserts that because Sykes was found in her car unconscious and arrived in the emergency room in an altered mental state, hospital staff determined the tests were medically necessary.



The State acknowledges Sykes could have withheld consent to either test had she been oriented as to time, place, and person. Nurse Costello testified that the treatment plan for Sykes, which included a CT scan and a blood test, in addition to the urine test, was ordered by Dr. Patel.



Nurse Never Talked To Cops The evidence did not show that the police asked hospital staff to...

Action

Yorum Gönder

0 Yorumlar