Committee advances bill to require senior-officer consult before declining toxicology in fatal crashes

Senators and witnesses told the committee SB 226 is aimed at improving investigations of fatal motor-vehicle crashes by adding a required consult with a senior officer when an on-scene officer believes additional testing is not reasonable.

A sponsor described a tragic constituent case in Mountain Green in which a driver died after a head-on collision and "toxicology testing was not conducted." The sponsor said the bill—now in a second substitute—would require on-scene officers to consult a senior officer before declining testing that could lead to a warrant, so a second viewpoint informs the probable-cause judgment.

Why it matters: Supporters said the change strikes a balance between protecting Fourth Amendment rights and ensuring thorough investigations that could affect charging decisions and families’ closure. A victim advocate reading a family statement said, "The lack of toxicology screening will forever deprive me of a piece of knowing that every possible factor was examined and considered." The statement urged lawmakers to pass the change so families get fuller investigations.

Prosecutors and DPS weighed in: Carl Holland, executive director of the Statewide Association of Prosecutors, said the group "wholeheartedly support[s]" the bill as a balanced approach that highlights training and second opinions. Beau Mason of the Department of Public Safety said the second substitute protects constitutional limits while improving investigative verification with a senior officer.

Action taken: The committee adopted the second substitute and then voted to pass SB 226 (second substitute) out favorably on a voice vote.

What’s next: The bill will go to the floor. Supporters said the measure is intended to encourage consistent investigative practice and reduce instances where potentially relevant testing is not completed.