DNA samples can be taken from arrestees, says US Supreme Court
The U.S. Supreme Court recently determined that police officers may collect DNA samples from arrestees.
June 26, 2013
DNA samples can be taken from arrestees, says US Supreme CourtArticle provided by Conforti & Turner, LLP
Visit us at http://www.conforti-turner.com
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court indicated a practice common among law enforcement agencies in over half the states in the country -- including California -- is legal. The high court's decision involved the issue of whether a police officer should be allowed to take a DNA sample from an individual who has been arrested, but not yet convicted of a crime.
Prior to this decision, many states in the nation had already passed legislation allowing DNA samples to be taken from arrestees. Many argued that this practice infringed on people's Fourth Amendment right not to be subjected to unreasonable searches and seizures. The U.S. Supreme Court determined the practice did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
Maryland v. King
The casebefore the Supreme Court began when a man was arrested in Maryland in 2009 on charges of assault. Like California, Maryland had a law in place that allowed law enforcement officers to take a DNA sample from individuals who had been arrested for serious crimes. Consequently, a DNA sample was taken from the arrestee without officers first obtaining a warrant.
When entered into a national database, the DNA sample taken from the individual matched DNA from a rape case in 2003 that had never been solved. As a result, the man who was originally charged with assault was also charged with rape. After being convicted of rape and given a life sentence in a lower court, the Maryland Court of Appeals reversed the sentence, indicating the Maryland law was unconstitutional.
Justice Kennedy, writing for the majority in the 5-4 decision, compared taking a DNA sample to the common booking procedure of taking an individual's photograph and fingerprints upon arrest. While agreeing that taking a DNA sample constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment, Justice Kennedy argued that swabbing the inside of someone's cheek did not amount to an unreasonable search.
Justice Scalia, dissenting, contended that the majority's decision violated the Fourth Amendment, arguing that even those who are wrongly arrested will now have their DNA stored in a national database.
Protect your rights when facing criminal charges
The time period following an arrest can be nerve-wracking and confusing. Nevertheless, it is crucial for individuals to be aware of their rights when facing criminal charges. In such cases, it is wise to seek the advice of a skilled criminal defense attorney to ensure a strong defense is established on behalf of the individual facing charges.