Criminal law — DUI manslaughter — Possession of cocaine — Post conviction relief — Counsel — Ineffectiveness — Given state of law at the time and information available to counsel, failure to file motion to suppress warrantless blood draw based on lack of consent by defendant or lack of exigent circumstances constituted deficient performance — Evidence not sufficient to permit court to conclude that exigent circumstances existed based on dissipation of alcohol in defendant’s blood during time needed to obtain warrant — State’s argument that fact that victim died, combined with dissipation of alcohol in defendant’s blood, constituted exigent circumstances is foreclosed by contrary holding by district court of appeals — Good faith exception to exclusionary rule not bar to suppression — Court concludes that defendant would have succeeded on motion to suppress and that court would have suppressed evidence of his blood alcohol content from trial — Prejudice — Without BAC number in evidence, state would not have been able to call its expert to testify as to specific effects a person could feel at that BAC level and could not argue that defendant was suffering from those specific effects and ask the jury to draw inference that defendant’s high level of intoxication was the reason victim died — Extensive discussion of Missouri v. McNeely