Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
78. Should the court suppress the DNA sample?
The defendant was later acquitted of burglary. A year later, however, authorities matched the defendant's DNA to an unsolved sexual assault crime. The defendant, now charged with sexual assault, has moved to suppress the DNA sample as having been obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
The police informed the defendant of the state law and said that they would be using a cheek swab to obtain a DNA sample from him. The defendant did not object.
A defendant was arrested and charged with burglary. Under state law, police are required to obtain DNA samples from all persons arrested for felonies and to store those samples in a state registry.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
A is incorrect. There is no requirement that a person must object at the time of a search or seizure to retain the right to lodge a Fourth Amendment challenge later.
C is incorrect. The statute does not violate the Fourth Amendment. Under King, state laws that authorize the collection, testing, storage, and comparison of DNA samples of arrested persons are constitutional. Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013). Whether or not the police acted in good-faith reliance upon the statute is irrelevant.
D is incorrect. King specifically affirms the right to collect DNA from felony arrestees. Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. 435 (2013). The state law in this case allowed for the collection and storage of the defendant's DNA and, therefore, the sample should not be suppressed.