More Than 93.1% of Our DUI Cases Have Resulted in No Conviction Over the Past 13 Years
More than 15 years of experience challenging the Supreme Court in DUI cases.
Confrontation Clause Issues
With DUI and Murder in the Stage of Georgia
Willis Law Firm is one of the only DUI practices in Georgia — and among very few nationally — actively litigating constitutional challenges at the U.S. Supreme Court level. This is not marketing language. These are real filings.
Pillar One
Fourth Amendment — Unlawful Blood Draws
Willis Law filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging Georgia’s implied consent law, which punishes drivers for refusing a warrantless blood draw — even when they’re asserting their constitutional rights.
Pillar Two
Sixth Amendment — Confrontation Clause in DUI & Murder
Greg is actively briefing Confrontation Clause challenges tied directly to Crawford v. Washington, Melendez-Diaz, and the 2024 SCOTUS ruling in Smith v. Arizona — arguing lab results cannot come in without live analyst testimony.
Pillar One — Fourth Amendment
Challenging Georgia’s Blood Test Law at the U.S. Supreme Court
Georgia law automatically suspends your driver’s license if you refuse a blood test — and allows prosecutors to use that refusal as evidence of guilt at trial. Willis Law Firm filed a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing this crosses a clear constitutional line.
In Birchfield v. North Dakota, the Supreme Court held that police cannot force a blood draw without a warrant unless there is an emergency. Georgia’s implied consent law effectively punishes drivers for exercising their Fourth Amendment rights, using civil and evidentiary penalties to coerce blood draws the government has no warrant to demand.
This case was filed by the same legal team that partnered with Greg Willis in the 2024 SCOTUS victory McElrath v. Georgia
The core argument: If it was unconstitutional to criminalize refusal in Birchfield, it is even more extreme for Georgia to impose license suspension and trial-level guilt inferences for the same act of saying no to a warrantless blood draw.
Pillar Two — Sixth Amendment
The Confrontation Clause: When Lab Results Can’t Come In Without Live Testimony
The Sixth Amendment guarantees every accused person the right to confront the witnesses against them. In DUI and murder cases, this becomes critical when prosecutors introduce blood or toxicology lab reports without calling the actual analyst who ran the test to testify.
Greg Willis is actively litigating Confrontation Clause challenges in Georgia courts — filing briefs that invoke a line of U.S. Supreme Court precedent that most DUI attorneys never engage with.
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right… to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”
— U.S. Constitution, Sixth Amendment
2004
Crawford v. Washington
Established that “testimonial” out-of-court statements cannot be admitted unless the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the person who made them. The foundation of all modern Confrontation Clause law.
2009
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts
Held that lab analyst certificates are testimonial statements. The analyst who actually ran the test must take the stand — a certificate alone is not enough. Direct impact on DUI blood and breath evidence.
2024
Smith v. Arizona
SCOTUS ruled that a substitute analyst cannot testify about a report prepared by a different analyst. The person who did the work must testify. This is the most recent and directly applicable ruling — and exactly what Greg is litigating in Georgia courts now.
Three U.S. Supreme Court Cases That Define This Issue
Court Filings Documents
These are real filings from Willis Law Firm. Read the arguments Greg is making at the constitutional level — in cases involving DUI charges and murder.
SCOTUS Petition — Georgia Implied Consent / Blood Draw Law
U.S. Supreme Court · Filed 2025
View Blog PostMotion to Suppress — Blood Refusal Evidence (DUI) · Signed Order Granting Motion
Motion to Suppress — Blood Refusal Evidence (DUI) · Greg Willis, Counsel
View Case PDFJohns v. Georgia — Confrontation Clause Petition (Murder)
U.S. Supreme Court · No. 25-689 · Greg Willis, Counsel
View Case PDF View Case Brief Reply