{"id":7624,"date":"2012-12-08T07:33:48","date_gmt":"2012-08-23T09:43:41","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2012-08-23T09:43:41","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7624","title":{"rendered":"MD: Surreptitious DNA collection from abandoned straw not unreasonable under Fourth Amendment"},"content":{"rendered":"

Defendant\u2019s DNA was taken from a straw left at the probation office, and this was not unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment. He was connected to a manslaughter. Corbin v. State<\/a>, 428 Md. 488, 52 A.3d 946 (2012):<\/p>\n

We again examine the evolving law regarding the scope of Fourth Amendment protections in the context of the collection and analysis of DNA by police. Unlike in earlier Maryland cases, the Maryland DNA Collection Act does not apply here because Petitioner Tonto Corbin was not arrested for any of the Act’s predicate offenses. Rather, Corbin was on probation for a drunken driving offense when his DNA was collected. The DNA was taken from saliva that Corbin left on a straw in the course of complying with an alcohol monitoring program mandated by the terms of his probation. Corbin challenges the use of that saliva in connection with a separate murder investigation that resulted in incriminating evidence against him.<\/p>\n

We granted certiorari to address the following questions, as Corbin phrased them:<\/p>\n

1. Does a DWI probationer, who had previously declined police requests to seize and test his DNA, voluntarily surrender his breath for DNA testing where State officers seize his DNA on the false pretense of seizing and testing only his blood alcohol?<\/p>\n

2. In an entirely circumstantial case, was the evidence of Petitioner’s criminal agency legally insufficient because the State failed to establish that it was any stronger than evidence implicating two or three other suspects?<\/p>\n

We shall hold that Corbin’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when the State recovered his DNA from the straw utilized for this mandatory test. We shall also hold that the evidence was sufficient to sustain Corbin’s conviction.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/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-7624","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7624","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=7624"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7624\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7624"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7624"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7624"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}