{"id":9511,"date":"2013-12-15T06:45:35","date_gmt":"2013-09-28T13:17:49","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2013-09-28T13:17:49","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=9511","title":{"rendered":"MD: Maryland v. King on remand with the same result"},"content":{"rendered":"

King on remand: Maryland follows SCOTUS and also finds the burden of proof not shifted to defendant. King v. State<\/a>, 434 Md. 472, 76 A.3d 1035 (2013), on remand from Maryland v. King<\/a>, 133 S. Ct. 1958, 186 L. Ed. 2d 1 (2013):<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The remaining two questions are:
\n(1) Does the Maryland DNA Collection Act violate Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights?; and
\n(2) Did the trial judge improperly shift the burden of proof to the defense to demonstrate that a search or seizure made without individualized suspicions is reasonable?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

(1) It doesn\u2019t because Art. 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights is interpreted the same as the Fourth Amendment.<\/p>\n

(2) The burden of proof wasn\u2019t shifted.<\/p>\n

We disagree with King’s contention and conclude that, regardless of the “disguise” employed to characterize King’s challenge,6 the prima facie burden remains on the defendant to advance evidence of how the State failed to comply with the Act. Because King failed to point to any relevant evidence supporting his claims of statutory violations, he failed to meet his burden and the trial court denied properly the motion to suppress the evidence. Furthermore, even assuming a violation of the Act had been advanced properly (which we do not find here), there is no reversible error. In the latter regard, which party shouldered properly the burden to prove whether the State complied with the Act is an irrelevant point ultimately because we find an exclusionary rule inapplicable to the alleged violations of the DNA Collection Act.<\/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-9511","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9511","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=9511"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9511\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=9511"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=9511"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=9511"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}