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, represents a significant shift in DWI enforcement that has already produced measurable effects on prosecution rates and legal procedures.
Prior to the policy implementation, drivers arrested for DWI could refuse breath testing after hearing Missouri's implied consent warning, which informs drivers that refusal results in a one-year license suspension. This refusal option sometimes complicated prosecutions by eliminating chemical evidence of blood-alcohol concentration, allowing defense attorneys to argue alternative explanations for driver behavior or challenge the reliability of field sobriety tests.
The new policy ensures prosecutors obtain chemical evidence of intoxication, addressing what authorities described as loopholes in DWI cases. Missouri's emphasis on demonstrable evidence makes this chemical proof particularly valuable in court proceedings. However, the policy creates a dual penalty system where drivers now face two separate license suspensions from a single stop: a one-year suspension for refusing a breath test and an additional 90-day suspension if subsequent blood testing shows blood-alcohol concentration above 0.08 percent.
According to criminal defense attorney Brendan Block, the mandatory testing shifts legal focus to procedural compliance and evidence validity. "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.
The policy has produced immediate statistical impacts, with DWI filings increasing by nearly 40 percent from 498 cases in 2024. However, practical challenges have emerged, including concerns about hospitals being overwhelmed by blood draw requests, medical personnel refusing draws due to liability concerns, and delays in obtaining judicial warrants during overnight hours.
Block identifies timing as the most significant challenge in blood-draw cases, noting that blood-alcohol concentration decreases over time. "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.
While all administrative suspensions may be appealed by DWI attorneys, including refusal suspensions and those based on alleged test results above legal limits, the policy creates new complexities for both prosecution and defense. The increased filings suggest the policy is achieving its enforcement goals, but the practical implementation challenges indicate ongoing adjustments will be necessary as the county refines its approach to DWI enforcement.
