DNA Database Trawls and the Definition of a Search in Boroian v. Mueller
David H. Kaye
The Pennsylvania State University Dickinson School of Law
August 4, 2011
Virginia Law Review, Vol. 97, pp. 41-49, 2011
The Pennsylvania State University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 19-2011
As a general matter, once the government acquires information from a permissible search or seizure, it can use this information in later criminal investigations. Courts have applied this simple rule to uphold the indefinite reuse of DNA samples acquired from convicted offenders. This essay describes the First Circuit Court of Appeals’ reliance on the rule in rejecting a convicted offender’s claim that his DNA sample and profile had to be removed from the federal DNA databank after he completed his sentence. Acknowledging that the rule permitting reuse should not be applied mechanically, I argue that the rule's application to DNA databases is correct because merely retrawling a database for matches to a crime-scene sample does not implicate any cognizable Fourth Amendment interest.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 10
Keywords: search and seizure, fourth amendment, DNA database, reuse, trawling
Date posted: August 8, 2011 ; Last revised: August 23, 2011
© 2015 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.421 seconds