{"id":5446,"date":"2012-05-10T18:26:02","date_gmt":"2011-04-17T08:21:47","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-04-17T08:21:47","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5446","title":{"rendered":"VI: Request for DNA sample requires a factual basis; motion denied without prejudice to seek a SW"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The request for buccal samples for DNA testing requires either consent or a search warrant. The request for a court order is denied without prejudice since the People failed to show a factual basis for the request. They can, however, apply for a search warrant. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.visuperiorcourt.org\/opinions\/pdfs\/PVI%20v.%20Hardcastle-Opinion.pdf\">People v. Hardcastle<\/a>, 55 V.I. 93 (Super. Ct. 2011):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>In its request for saliva buccal samples from the defendants, the People in following the Supreme Court&#8217;s instructions in <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=9806833505253407923&amp;q=Schmerber&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,4\">Schmerber<\/a> are required to provide sufficient evidentiary support for the Court to find probable cause that the saliva specimens could link C. Hardcastle and O. Hardcastle to the drug or firearm charges filed against them. Even though the People obviously failed to apply for a search warrant, in considering the People&#8217;s motion to compel saliva specimens from defendant as an application for a search warrant, the Court finds that the People have failed to articulate a single fact to support a finding that the saliva specimens  requested could link either of the defendants to the drug or firearm charges against them. Accordingly, it is clear that failing to provide such essential evidentiary nexus the People have failed to meet its probable cause burden under the Fourth Amendment.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Defendant was arrested in Mississippi for possession of a murder victim\u2019s missing car. When he was searched, the victim\u2019s credit cards were found on him. Seizure of the clothing for DNA testing was not unreasonable. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.fifthcircuit.org\/PDF\/OPINIONS\/PO\/2011\/9E94CB34-83EA-4EBA-952B-6BAD80ECECE8.pdf\">State v. Santini<\/a>, 64 So. 3d 790 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2011).*<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=5446\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5446","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=5446"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5446\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=5446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=5446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=5446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}