In Zielke v. State, 137 Wis. 2d 39, 403 N.W.2d 427 (1987), the court considered the question of "whether the implied consent law sets forth the exclusive method of gathering chemical test evidence thereby requiring suppression upon noncompliance...." Zielke, 137 Wis. 2d at 44. Zielke was arrested for operating while intoxicated after causing a fatal accident. At the hospital, the arresting officer secured Zielke's consent to a blood test. Upon the advice of an assistant district attorney, the arresting officer did not advise Zielke "about any consequences flowing from refusal to submit to a test, nor did he read from the 'Informing the Accused Form.'" Zielke, 137 Wis. 2d at 43. The trial court suppressed the test results, reasoning that the implied consent law was the exclusive means to obtain a chemical test of a driver's blood alcohol level. See Zielke, 137 Wis. 2d at 44. The supreme court reversed, reasoning that the blood sample was constitutionally obtained and there was nothing in the implied consent law rendering the results inadmissible in a criminal prosecution. See Zielke, 137 Wis. 2d at 52.