NY Bronx: State’s request for def’s DNA came too late under discovery statute

The state’s argument that defendant doesn’t have a Fifth Amendment privilege in his DNA is a straw man not even argued by the defense. He does have a Fourth Amendment right, and the state’s request for DNA here was far too late under the statute on state’s discovery. The burden of showing prejudice is not on the defendant. The court denies the motion on reargument. People v. Addison, 2016 NY Slip Op 26015, 2016 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 171 (Bronx Co. Jan. 15, 2016).*

“Carlill’s situation presents an even stronger case for finding agents had probable cause for his arrest. Unlike Heiden, Carlill was not a mere passenger, but was the driver of the truck and the owner of both the truck and the trailer. These facts, particularly when coupled with Carlill’s short visit to Mexico and fidgety behavior, support his arrest ‘as a probable party to the importation.’ … Simply put, the totality of the circumstances of this case support a finding of probable cause because ‘knowledge may be reasonably inferred where the defendant drives a car “laden” with illegal substances.’ … Accordingly, there was no illegal arrest and Carlill’s post-arrest statement is not subject to suppression on that basis.” United States v. Carlill, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175111 (D.Ariz. Dec. 18, 2015).*