{"id":7658,"date":"2012-09-02T16:24:56","date_gmt":"2012-09-02T15:22:09","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2012-09-01T15:09:47","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7658","title":{"rendered":"Labor Day Special: SCOTUS Lurking"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Missouri v. McNealy<\/strong>, scheduled for conference on September 24. SCOTUSBlog <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/case-files\/missouri-v-mcneely\/\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Issue: Whether a law enforcement officer may obtain a nonconsensual and warrantless blood sample from a drunk driver under the exigent circumstances exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement based upon the natural dissipation of alcohol in the bloodstream.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><strong>Maryland v. King<\/strong>, conference not yet set. SCOTUSBlog <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/2012\/07\/dna-testing-may-go-on\/\">here<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scotusblog.com\/case-files\/maryland-v-king\/\">here<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Issue: Whether the Fourth Amendment allows the states to collect and analyze DNA from people arrested and charged with serious crimes.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Chief Justice Roberts granting a stay July 31st telling us how he&#8217;s voting, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/opinions\/11pdf\/12A48c3d7.pdf\">Maryland v. King, Roberts, Ch.J. in chambers<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>To begin, there is a reasonable probability this Court will grant certiorari. Maryland\u2019s decision conflicts with decisions of the U. S. Courts of Appeals for the Third and  Ninth Circuits as well as  the Virginia Supreme Court, which have upheld statutes similar to Maryland\u2019s DNA Collection Act. See United States  v. Mitchell, 652 F.3d 387 (CA3 2011), cert. denied, 566 U.S. ___ (2012); Haskell v. Harris, 669 F.3d 1049 (CA9 2012), reh\u2019g en banc granted, 2012 WL 3038593 (July 25, 2012);  Anderson  v. Commonwealth, 274 Va. 469, 650 S.E.2d 702 (2007), cert. denied, 553 U. S. 1054 (2008); see also Mario W. v. Kaipio, 2012 WL 2401343 (Ariz. 2012) (holding that seizure of a juvenile\u2019s buccal cells does not violate the Fourth Amendment but that extracting a DNA profile before the juvenile is convicted does).<\/p>\n<p>The split implicates an important feature of day-to-day law enforcement practice in approximately half the States and the Federal Government.  Reply to Memorandum in Opposition 3; see 114 Stat. 2728, as amended, 42 U.S.C. \u00a714135a(a)(1)(A) (authorizing the Attorney General to \u201ccollect DNA samples from individuals who are arrested, facing charges, or convicted\u201d).  Indeed, the decision below has direct effects beyond Maryland: Because the DNA samples Maryland collects may  otherwise be eligible for the FBI\u2019s national DNA database, the decision renders the database less effective for other States and the Federal Government. These factors make it reasonably probable that the Court will grant certiorari to resolve the split on the question presented. In addition, given the considered analysis of courts on the other side of the split, there is a fair prospect that this Court will reverse the decision below. <\/p>\n<p>Finally, the decision below subjects Maryland to ongoing  irreparable harm. &#8230;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=7658\">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-7658","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7658","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=7658"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7658\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=7658"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=7658"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=7658"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}