In State v. Bergmann, the defendant was arrested for drunken driving and taken to a hospital where blood was drawn. The results of the blood test were suppressed because of the unconstitutional way the blood was collected. The attorney sent a note to the prosecutor's office that included the medical records to reference the blood-alcohol content of the driver, Bergmann. Over the defendant's objection, the blood-alcohol evidence was introduced against him at his trial for driving under the influence. Why did the trial court rule that there was no doctor-patient privilege involved here, and that the blood evidence was properly admitted against Bergmann?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of In State v. Bergmann, the defendant was arrested for drunken driving and taken to a hospital where blood was drawn. The results of the blood test were suppressed because of the unconstitutional way the blood was collected. The attorney sent a note to the prosecutor's office that included the medical records to reference the blood-alcohol content of the driver, Bergmann. Over the defendant's objection, the blood-alcohol evidence was introduced against him at his trial for driving under the influence. Why did the trial court rule that there was no doctor-patient privilege involved here, and that the blood evidence was properly admitted against Bergmann?

In State V