Legal News

Is Our DNA Protected Under the Fourth Amendment?
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Is grabbing a suspect’s DNA profile on the same level as collecting his fingerprints? This issue has made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled Monday to let Maryland’s Law stay in effect until they can consider the constitutionality of it in more detail. The case is testing the limits of the fourth amendment — which guarantees the right of privacy and legislates the necessity for law enforcement to attain a warrant before searching and seizing — because Alonza King Jr. was convicted of first degree rape using DNA evidence collected from a prior and unrelated arrest.

About half the States have similar laws as Maryland, who collects DNA samples from all arrests involving accusations of violence. No conviction is necessary to collect DNA evidence, merely the arrest, and that DNA profile may be eligible to be added to the FBI’s national DNA database.

“Collecting DNA from individuals arrested for violent felonies provides a valuable tool for investigating unsolved crimes and thereby helping to remove violence offenders from the general population,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts. “Crimes for which DNA evidence is implicated tend to be serious, and serious crimes cause serious injuries. That Maryland may not employ a duly enacted statute to help prevent these injuries constitutes irreparable harm.”


Maryland’s DNA Collection Act has divided their court of appeals, which ruled that King’s rights had indeed been violated, since an arrested suspect has a right to more privacy than a convicted felon, and noting that the DNA collection was not necessary for identifying him. State officials did not want this to “result in the loss of a valuable crime-fighting tool relied upon by Maryland,” so took it to the higher court. Their contention is that fingerprinting and collecting “biometric information” is the same sort of thing.

Though the Maryland’s court ruled that King’s privacy under the Fourth Amendment outweighs the State’s interests, Roberts claims that the decision conflicts with three other courts who ruled differently on the law, and that this “implicates an important feature of day-to-day law enforcement practice,” and half of U.S. states and in the federal government.

The Supreme Court is expected to consider Maryland’s appeal in October.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!



Executive Director, MDC Foundation


All applications must be submitted online at Job Opening ID: 1001435  ...

Apply now

Legal Assistant


Qualifications High school or equivalent (Preferred) Microsoft Office: 1...

Apply now

Experienced Municipal/Land Use Attorney

USA-NY-White Plains

Mid-sized White Plains law firm seeks attorney with minimum 4-7 years’ experience in municipal...

Apply now

Staff Attorney - Eviction Prevention Unit | Multiple locations in WA


Northwest Justice Project (NJP) is a not-for-profit statewide law firm that pursues its mission of C...

Apply now




Search Now

Commercial Litigation Attorney

USA-CA-Los Angeles

Los Angeles office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks commercial litigation attorney...

Apply Now

SEC Attorney


Waltham office of our client seeks SEC attorney with 3-5 years of experience to assist with all aspe...

Apply Now

Mid to Senior-level Real Estate Associate Attorney


Miami office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks mid to senior-level real estate asso...

Apply Now


To Top