Category Archives: DNA

D.Minn.: DNA on firearm was a reasonable inference justifying SW for def’s DNA

It was reasonable to infer that defendant’s DNA would be found on a firearm in a car, so the warrant to take his was reasonable. United States v. Tyus, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 234639 (D. Minn. Dec. 8, 2023), adopted, … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Probable cause, Seizure | Comments Off on D.Minn.: DNA on firearm was a reasonable inference justifying SW for def’s DNA

S.D.Cal.: A pending forfeiture action in another district justifies dismissal of Rule 41(g) motion because there is another remedy

This is a Rule 41(g) action for return of property, a superyacht owned by a Russian oligarch seized allegedly in violation of Russian sanctions. The next day, a forfeiture action was filed in the S.D.N.Y., and that provided an adequate … Continue reading

Posted in Arrest or entry on arrest, DNA, Prison and jail searches, Rule 41(g) / Return of property | Comments Off on S.D.Cal.: A pending forfeiture action in another district justifies dismissal of Rule 41(g) motion because there is another remedy

E.D.Wis: Faced with motion to suppress DNA evidence, govt can seek it again

The government obtained DNA and defendant moved to suppress. Then the government sought DNA by warrant again with a new warrant. It is permitted to do so. United States v. Watson, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185148 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 16, … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Independent source, Inevitable discovery | Comments Off on E.D.Wis: Faced with motion to suppress DNA evidence, govt can seek it again

D.Haw.: 11-month delay in getting DNA warrant was reasonable

An eleven month delay in the government obtaining a DNA warrant was reasonable. “Under the totality of the circumstances, the Court concludes that, while the search warrant perhaps could have been sought earlier, the eleven-month period between arrest and the … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, geofence, Private search, Staleness | Comments Off on D.Haw.: 11-month delay in getting DNA warrant was reasonable

DE: When defense to rape is consent, 4A claim against DNA test doesn’t matter

Where the defense was consent, the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to move to suppress DNA results can’t be ineffectiveness. State v. Elder, 2023 Del. Super. LEXIS 770 (Sep. 13, 2023).* CBP officers used an “escort hold” on … Continue reading

Posted in Border search, DNA, Excessive force, Informant hearsay, Probable cause | Comments Off on DE: When defense to rape is consent, 4A claim against DNA test doesn’t matter

N.D.Ind.: No IAC where def pled but co-def prevailed on 4A claim

Defendant entered into a beneficial plea agreement and pled to a superseding information and was sentenced. Later, the passenger in his car filed a motion to suppress and prevailed. Still, this was not ineffective assistance of his counsel. “Aside from … Continue reading

Posted in Automobile exception, Consent, DNA, Ineffective assistance | Comments Off on N.D.Ind.: No IAC where def pled but co-def prevailed on 4A claim

D.Md.: Instagram SW was valid by GFE despite weak PC, but it was excessively searched

“The Instagram Motion [to suppress] will be granted in part. Although the probable cause to search Rivers’ Instagram account was weak, the Leon good faith exception applies and the evidence will therefore not be suppressed on the basis of a … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Excessive force, Scope of search, Social media warrants | Comments Off on D.Md.: Instagram SW was valid by GFE despite weak PC, but it was excessively searched

GA: Refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial

Defendant’s refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial. Post-arrest cheek swabs do not violate the Fourth Amendment because they are accepted police booking and jailing procedures, similar to fingerprinting and photographing. … Continue reading

Posted in Admissibility of evidence, DNA, Franks doctrine, Reasonable suspicion | Comments Off on GA: Refusal to consent to taking a DNA swab in a rape investigation is admissible at trial

KY: The conditions of parole factor into reasonableness of a parole search

Defendant did not properly preserve his state constitutional claim that warrantless parole searches should be more protective of a suspect’s rights than the Fourth Amendment. On the Fourth Amendment claim, the search complied with Samson and Knights. The conditions of … Continue reading

Posted in Cell phones, Consent, DNA, Probation / Parole search, Reasonable suspicion, Reasonableness | Comments Off on KY: The conditions of parole factor into reasonableness of a parole search

LA5: SW improperly suppressed without applying GFE

The trial court erred in not finding the search warrant here was saved by the good faith exception. “Upon review of the application, we find none of the scenarios proposed in Leon are present in this case. Thus, the trial … Continue reading

Posted in DNA, Good faith exception | Comments Off on LA5: SW improperly suppressed without applying GFE

NYT: Your DNA Can Now Be Pulled From Thin Air. Privacy Experts Are Worried.

NYT: Your DNA Can Now Be Pulled From Thin Air. Privacy Experts Are Worried. By Elizabeth Anne Brown (“New DNA collecting techniques are ‘like catnip”’for law enforcement officials, says Erin Murphy, a law professor at the New York University School … Continue reading

Posted in DNA | Comments Off on NYT: Your DNA Can Now Be Pulled From Thin Air. Privacy Experts Are Worried.

ABA: Regulating Forensic Genetic Genealogy: Balancing Privacy Concerns with the Needs of Law Enforcement in a Time of Consumer DNA Testing Services

Regulating Forensic Genetic Genealogy: Balancing Privacy Concerns with the Needs of Law Enforcement in a Time of Consumer DNA Testing Services by Devinder Hans (ABA Mar. 28, 2023)

Posted in DNA, Third Party Doctrine | Comments Off on ABA: Regulating Forensic Genetic Genealogy: Balancing Privacy Concerns with the Needs of Law Enforcement in a Time of Consumer DNA Testing Services

Cal.4: Misdemeanants stated claim that DNA testing of them was a violation of state right of privacy

Plaintiffs stated a claim that the Orange County program for collection of DNA from misdemeanants violated their right to privacy. There may be instances were a misdemeanor may be a “serious crime” but in general, no. The trial court erred … Continue reading

Posted in Consent, DNA, Reasonable expectation of privacy | Comments Off on Cal.4: Misdemeanants stated claim that DNA testing of them was a violation of state right of privacy

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