This Chicago DUI lawyer has posted here, here, and here on DUI blood draws. While it may be surprising, more and more hospitals are "just saying no" to DUI blood draws.
I recently reviewed an Alcohol Drug Influence Report with the following narrative:
E.R. drew blood from subject. R/o's [Responding Officers] were unable to obtain results from blood draw per/ Dr. X (Y Hospital) due to HIPPA [sic].This is pretty interesting because HIPAA has an exception for DUI blood draws, well at least the government always says that.
(625 ILCS 5/11‑501.4) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 11‑501.4)
Sec. 11‑501.4. Admissibility of chemical tests of blood or urine conducted in the regular course of providing emergency medical treatment.
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the results of blood or urine tests performed for the purpose of determining the content of alcohol, other drug or drugs, or intoxicating compound or compounds, or any combination thereof, of an individual's blood or urine conducted upon persons receiving medical treatment in a hospital emergency room are admissible in evidence as a business record exception to the hearsay rule only in prosecutions for any violation of Section 11‑501 of this Code or a similar provision of a local ordinance, or in prosecutions for reckless homicide brought under the Criminal Code of 1961, when each of the following criteria are met:
(1) the chemical tests performed upon an individual's blood or urine were ordered in the regular course of providing emergency medical treatment and not at the request of law enforcement authorities;
(2) the chemical tests performed upon an individual's blood or urine were performed by the laboratory routinely used by the hospital; and
(3) results of chemical tests performed upon an individual's blood or urine are admissible into evidence regardless of the time that the records were prepared.
(b) The confidentiality provisions of law pertaining to medical records and medical treatment shall not be applicable with regard to chemical tests performed upon an individual's blood or urine under the provisions of this Section in prosecutions as specified in subsection (a) of this Section. No person shall be liable for civil damages as a result of the evidentiary use of chemical testing of an individual's blood or urine test results under this Section, or as a result of that person's testimony made available under this Section.
Seriously, is this what you want your government to do?