implied consent

What is Implied Consent in North Carolina?

Published on: September 3, 2025 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

What is Implied Consent in North Carolina?

When you obtain a driver’s license in North Carolina, you have some privileges as well as obligations. A license gives you the right to drive as long as you follow the rules and laws. If you get too many violations, the DMV could suspend or revoke your license. One of the most serious driving violations you may face is driving while impaired (DWI). If you are suspected of DWI in North Carolina, law enforcement will ask you to submit to a test to determine your level of impairment. As part of your driver’s license agreement, you consent to complete chemical tests for DWI.

Implied Consent in North Carolina

Five Misconceptions About DWI in North Carolina

Published on: September 14, 2022 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “Are breath test results always accurate?”

Five Misconceptions About DWI in North Carolina

What is North Carolina’s Law of Implied Consent in DWI Cases?

Published on: November 4, 2020 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “What am I obligated to do if I’ve been pulled for Drinking and Driving?”

If you were pulled over and a police officer believes that you were driving under the influence of alcohol, you may be asked to submit to chemical testing to detect the presence of alcohol in your system.

Defenses to a Failed Breathalyzer Test in North Carolina

Published on: February 26, 2020 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “Are breath test results always accurate?”

If you were pulled over for driving while impaired (DWI) in Charlotte or other parts of North Carolina, a police officer might order a breathalyzer test to determine your blood alcohol concentration (BAC).

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Case on Implied Consent

Published on: February 13, 2019 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “What am I obligated to do if I’ve been pulled for Drinking and Driving?”

Only a small percentage of cases make their way to the United States Supreme Court. The case of State v. Mitchell is one of the chosen few that will be heard by the justices in the coming term. The case revolves around the issue of implied consent. State v. Mitchell originated in Wisconsin, but its content is not a stranger to North Carolina. The North Carolina Supreme Court heard a case about implied consent in State v. Romano. In Romano, the North Carolina court found that withdrawing blood from an unconscious DWI suspect violated the Fourth Amendment because there was no exigent circumstance.

The Rights You’ll Forfeit by not Calling Your DWI Attorney Over the Holidays

Published on: December 1, 2016 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “What steps should I be taking outside legal guidance to help my DWI case?”

With so many holidays right around the corner, we wanted to take this opportunity to remind everyone of the imperative of calling your attorney immediately if you are arrested or face new criminal charges this holiday season.

Supreme Court: You Can’t Criminalize DUI Refusal to Submit a Blood Test

Published on: June 28, 2016 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI Lawyer Brad Smith answers the question: “What am I obligated to do if I’ve been pulled for Drinking and Driving?”

The United States Supreme Court has had a busy last few weeks when it comes to the Fourth Amendment. Two of its most recent opinions in particular underline how unpredictable the nation’s highest court’s decisions on search and seizure rights are after the death of Justice Scalia.

Court Tackles Implied Consent Law

Published on: August 21, 2015 | On behalf of Arnold & Smith, PLLC

Charlotte DWI and Criminal Defense Attorney J. Bradley Smith of Arnold & Smith, PLLC answers the question “Can the police search my car without a warrant?”

The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently issued a long-awaited opinion concerning the constitutionality of the state’s implied consent law. The Appeals Court affirmed the law, holding that a warrantless breath test qualifies as a valid search so long as it is connected to a lawful arrest.