Aggregated News
A federal appeals court decided to take another look at a California law that requires DNA samples to be taken from anyone arrested for a felony, not just after a conviction.
A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in February on a 2-1 vote. But the court said Wednesday a majority of its judges had decided to set the ruling aside and have an 11-judge panel review the case.
Opponents of the law say it amounts to an unconstitutional search and seizure.
But in February's ruling, Judge Milan Smith likened it to fingerprinting, saying law enforcement officers analyze only enough DNA information to identify the individual.
Law enforcement's interest in solving cold cases, identifying crime suspects and even exonerating the wrongly accused outweigh any privacy concerns raised by the forced DNA collections, the panel ruled.
State Attorney General Kamala Harris, a supporter of the law, said it has been used to reopen many cold cases.
Judge William Fletcher dissented, writing that the DNA samples are not used for identification purposes but as an investigative...
A panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law in February on a 2-1 vote. But the court said Wednesday a majority of its judges had decided to set the ruling aside and have an 11-judge panel review the case.
Opponents of the law say it amounts to an unconstitutional search and seizure.
But in February's ruling, Judge Milan Smith likened it to fingerprinting, saying law enforcement officers analyze only enough DNA information to identify the individual.
Law enforcement's interest in solving cold cases, identifying crime suspects and even exonerating the wrongly accused outweigh any privacy concerns raised by the forced DNA collections, the panel ruled.
State Attorney General Kamala Harris, a supporter of the law, said it has been used to reopen many cold cases.
Judge William Fletcher dissented, writing that the DNA samples are not used for identification purposes but as an investigative...
.jpg){kind=link}