This case is notable because it applies Birchfield v. North Dakota, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 2160 (2016) to a Pennsylvania implied consent/blood draw DUI case. I think this is the first published Superior Court opinion to do so. The arrest occurred in 2014, so that Court is willing to apply it to cases pending on appeal where the issue was timely raised. Though he did not directly raise the issue below as Birchfield had not yet been issued, Mr. Evans’ counsel diligently pursued it on appeal. The Court ruled that the implied consent law impermissibly imposed penalties for non-compliance with an unconstitutional warrantless search, the evidence obtained from the blood draw could not be admitted. The case was remanded for proceedings without the unlawfully seized evidence.