St. Louis County's No-Refusal DWI Policy Increases Prosecutions While Raising Defense Challenges

St. Louis County implemented a no-refusal policy for driving while intoxicated arrests in November 2025, eliminating the option for drivers to decline breath tests after arrest. The policy change, developed in partnership with Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), aims to provide prosecutors with chemical evidence of blood-alcohol concentration in all DWI cases. Previously, drivers could refuse testing after hearing Missouri's implied consent warning, which complicated prosecutions by eliminating scientific proof of intoxication.

Under the new policy, drivers now face potential double license suspensions from a single traffic stop. Refusing a breath test triggers an automatic one-year license suspension, while a subsequent blood test showing blood-alcohol concentration above 0.08 percent adds a 90-day suspension. All administrative suspensions, including those for refusal and test results above the legal limit, may be appealed through legal representation. The policy has significantly impacted DWI filings in St. Louis County, with cases increasing from 498 in 2024 to nearly 40 percent more in 2025 following implementation.

Defense attorneys have identified several challenges with the mandatory testing approach. Brendan Block, a St. Louis-area criminal defense attorney, noted that defense counsel's role becomes more critical when chemical testing becomes mandatory. "Once chemical testing becomes mandatory, the focus shifts to whether proper procedures and training were followed and whether the evidence holds up in court," said Block. Defense attorneys now concentrate on cross-examining arresting officers, reviewing police reports, and evaluating whether blood draws and testing complied with legal and constitutional requirements.

Practical implementation issues have emerged, including concerns about hospitals being overwhelmed or unable to perform timely blood draws, medical personnel refusing blood draws due to liability concerns, and delays caused by obtaining judicial warrants during overnight hours. Block identifies timing as the most significant challenge in blood-draw cases, noting that blood-alcohol concentration decreases as time passes. "I recently handled a case where it took two and a half hours to obtain a blood draw. The result was a 0.03 percent BAC, and the case was dismissed. If blood results are not obtained in a timely manner, it can ultimately hurt the prosecution in some DWI cases," Block explained.

The policy represents a significant shift in Missouri DWI enforcement, emphasizing demonstrable evidence in a state known as the "Show-Me State." While prosecutors gain scientific proof of intoxication in more cases, the increased reliance on blood testing creates new procedural hurdles that defense attorneys can challenge in court. The balance between enforcement efficiency and constitutional protections continues to evolve as the policy faces practical implementation challenges and legal scrutiny.