Category Archives: DNA

S.D.N.Y.: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases

The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases. Villafane v. City of N.Y., 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52149 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 27, 2023). There was probable cause for the search warrant for defendant’s DNA. United States v. Burkhalter, 2023 U.S. … Continue reading

Posted in § 1983 / Bivens, Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Exclusionary rule, Issue preclusion | Comments Off on S.D.N.Y.: The exclusionary rule doesn’t apply in § 1983 cases

CA3: Going from home to a drug deal is nexus to the home

“Contrary to Torres’ arguments, when an individual is suspected of dealing narcotics, probable cause to search his home does not demand a showing that he deals those narcotics at his home. The common-sense likelihood that drug dealers keep evidence of … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Nexus, Warrant execution | Comments Off on CA3: Going from home to a drug deal is nexus to the home

OH6: State could get a jury instruction that defendant refused to submit to a DNA search

The state could get a jury instruction that defendant refused to submit to a DNA search. State v. Roberts, 2023-Ohio-142, 2023 Ohio App. LEXIS 131 (6th Dist. Jan. 18, 2023). The facts in isolation may not show reasonable suspicion but … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, DNA, Dog sniff, Reasonable suspicion, State constitution | Comments Off on OH6: State could get a jury instruction that defendant refused to submit to a DNA search

AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

To argue that the state’s admissions in a response to a motion to suppress amount to a judicial admission of fact, the issue has to be argued to the trial court to preserve it. Otherwise, the trial court is free … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, Burden of pleading, DNA, Exclusionary rule, Waiver | Comments Off on AR: Claim state’s response to motion to suppress was judicial admission has to be presented to trial court

D.N.J.: No 6A right to have counsel present at execution of a DNA warrant in the jail

There is no Sixth Amendment right for counsel to be present when a DNA sample is taken from defendant at the jail by warrant. United States v. Hubbard, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3661 (D.N.J. Jan. 9, 2023). CBP had reasonable … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, Computer and cloud searches, DNA, Franks doctrine, Prison and jail searches | Comments Off on D.N.J.: No 6A right to have counsel present at execution of a DNA warrant in the jail

D.Minn.: Placing GPS on vehicle 2.5 hours before SW issued didn’t require suppression

“This Court concludes that the supporting affidavit for the GPS tracking warrant establishes probable cause.” “Here, it is undisputed that when the GPS tracking device was placed on the gold Chevy Tahoe at approximately 5:00 p.m. on March 3, 2022, … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, DNA, GPS / Tracking Data, Independent source, Inevitable discovery | Comments Off on D.Minn.: Placing GPS on vehicle 2.5 hours before SW issued didn’t require suppression

N.D.Ind.: The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant

The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant. United States v. Tyms, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 204894 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 10, 2022) Defendant was finally in custody when the police sought to take his … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, DNA, Exclusionary rule | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: The exclusionary rule is not the remedy for a high-speed chase to capture defendant

OH3: An expert witness is not required on the staleness of CP

There is no requirement of an expert in child pornography investigation to be an affiant to provide information about lack of staleness. Also, this was raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Benedict, 2022-Ohio-3600, 2022 Ohio App. LEXIS … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Ineffective assistance, Staleness | Comments Off on OH3: An expert witness is not required on the staleness of CP

DC: Tracking def off his WMATA fair card was like Knotts and reasonable

Police use of information off of defendant’s WMATA fare card first to find him to arrest him for a robbery on a train and then to place him on a train at the time of the robbery was reasonable. This … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, DNA, Franks doctrine, GPS / Tracking Data, Probable cause | Comments Off on DC: Tracking def off his WMATA fair card was like Knotts and reasonable

Wired: Police Used a Baby’s DNA to Investigate Its Father for a Crime

Wired: Police Used a Baby’s DNA to Investigate Its Father for a Crime (“The blood is supposed to be used for medical purposes—these screenings identify babies with serious health issues, and they have been highly successful at reducing death and … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Surveillance technology | Comments Off on Wired: Police Used a Baby’s DNA to Investigate Its Father for a Crime

CT: John Doe DNA arrest warrant based on touch DNA is too general to satisfy the particularity requirement

A John Doe DNA arrest warrant based on touch DNA is too general to satisfy the particularity requirement. State v. Terrance Police, 2022 Conn. LEXIS 123 (May 10, 2022):

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Particularity | Comments Off on CT: John Doe DNA arrest warrant based on touch DNA is too general to satisfy the particularity requirement

MD: Def’s DNA from a prior dismissed case admissible here

Defendant’s DNA was obtained in a 2014 case that was dismissed. The DNA from that was used to connect him to this case. The prior DNA results are not excludable just because the case went away. Hayes v. State, 2022 … Continue reading

Posted in Cell site location information, DNA, Dog sniff, Good faith exception, Seizure | Comments Off on MD: Def’s DNA from a prior dismissed case admissible here

NY Oneida: Order for DNA sample doesn’t require a pending criminal case

A DNA sample can be sought by court order before a criminal case is filed. People v. Forte, 2022 NY Slip Op 22066, 2022 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 873 (Oneida Co. Mar. 9, 2022). The scope and manner of the stop … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Reasonableness, Waiver | Comments Off on NY Oneida: Order for DNA sample doesn’t require a pending criminal case

Bloomberg Law: Police Search of Rape Victims’ DNA Tests Meaning of Consent

Bloomberg Law: Police Search of Rape Victims’ DNA Tests Meaning of Consent by Lydia Wheeler:

Posted in Consent, DNA | Comments Off on Bloomberg Law: Police Search of Rape Victims’ DNA Tests Meaning of Consent

NPR: San Francisco DA drops charges against woman linked to crime through rape victim DNA

NPR: San Francisco DA drops charges against woman linked to crime through rape victim DNA by Vanessa Romo (The DA found it a Fourth Amendment violation).

Posted in DNA | Comments Off on NPR: San Francisco DA drops charges against woman linked to crime through rape victim DNA

CO: Prosecutor’s closing argument that def refused consent to searching for DNA sample was reversible error

Prosecutor’s argument defendant refused to consent to taking his DNA in a sex crime prosecution violated the Fourth Amendment and was error here. People v. Buckner, 2022 COA 14, 2022 Colo. App. LEXIS 163 (Feb. 3, 2022). The bodycam video … Continue reading

Posted in Community caretaking function, Consent, DNA | Comments Off on CO: Prosecutor’s closing argument that def refused consent to searching for DNA sample was reversible error

CA7: Record supported finding that stop was not unreasonably extended

Whether a traffic stop was unreasonably extended for a drug dog to arrive is reviewed for clear error. The stop here was for overtinting, and the officer processed a warning by entering the information into the patrol car’s computer. He … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Ineffective assistance, Reasonableness, Standards of review | Comments Off on CA7: Record supported finding that stop was not unreasonably extended

D.Ariz.: Court could order DNA test after charging

The government moved for an order requiring defendant to submit to a buccal swab for DNA to include or exclude him from certain evidence in a homicide case. “Accordingly, the Court finds that, although a buccal swab of the cheek … Continue reading

Posted in Abandonment, DNA, Excessive force | Comments Off on D.Ariz.: Court could order DNA test after charging

UT: DNA SW can be executed by force; def has burden of showing unreasonable force was used to execute a DNA warrant on his person

A search warrant was issued for defendant’s DNA, and he resisted efforts to take it by buccal swab. He doesn’t challenge the probable cause, only the method of execution. He carries the burden of proof on the question of unreasonableness … Continue reading

Posted in Burden of proof, DNA, Reasonableness, Warrant execution | Comments Off on UT: DNA SW can be executed by force; def has burden of showing unreasonable force was used to execute a DNA warrant on his person

W.D.N.Y.: That DNA should have been expunged and wasn’t doesn’t mandate suppression under 4A

DNA that should have been expunged and wasn’t isn’t subject to suppression under the Fourth Amendment. United States v. Green, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212916 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2021):

Posted in DNA | Comments Off on W.D.N.Y.: That DNA should have been expunged and wasn’t doesn’t mandate suppression under 4A