| Revision as of 09:52, 5 June 2013 editSPat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers3,752 editsm see also: another recent case on DNA testing← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:23, 5 June 2013 edit undoMZMcBride (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users190,644 edits partially undid revision 558366169: links in a quote seem fine to me, American English puts punctuation marks inside quotation marks, and the case is over ("was" instead of "is")Next edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| '''''Maryland v. King''''', {{scite|569|___|2013}}, |
'''''Maryland v. King''''', {{scite|569|___|2013}}, was a ] case in which the Court held that "when officers make an arrest supported by ] to hold for a serious offense and bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody, taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's ] is, like ] and photographing, a legitimate ] procedure that is reasonable under the ]."<ref name="ussc"></ref> | ||
| While the case centered on Maryland's DNA collection practices, which only apply to people arrested for "serious crimes like murder, rape, assault, burglary and other crimes of violence |
While the case centered on Maryland's DNA collection practices, which only apply to people arrested for "serious crimes like murder, rape, assault, burglary and other crimes of violence," the Court's decision did not specify whether it was limited to serious crimes or any crime.<ref name="bigstory">{{cite news | ||
| |title=Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees | |title=Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees | ||
| |agency=] | |agency=] | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
| }}</ref> | }}</ref> | ||
| ==See also== | == See also == | ||
| * '']'' | * '']'' | ||
| == References == | == References == | ||
| {{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
| ] | ] | ||
Revision as of 20:23, 5 June 2013
2013 United States Supreme Court case| Maryland v. King | |
|---|---|
 Supreme Court of the United States | |
| Argued February 26, 2013 Decided June 3, 2013 | |
| Full case name | Maryland, Petitioner v. Alonzo Jay King, Jr. |
| Docket no. | 12-207 |
| Citations | 569 U.S. ___ (more)2013 U.S. LEXIS 4165 |
| Holding | |
| "When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody, taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment." | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, Alito |
| Dissent | Scalia, joined by Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Kagan |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. IV | |
Maryland v. King, 569 U.S. ___ (2013), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "when officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody, taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."
While the case centered on Maryland's DNA collection practices, which only apply to people arrested for "serious crimes like murder, rape, assault, burglary and other crimes of violence," the Court's decision did not specify whether it was limited to serious crimes or any crime. In his dissent, joined by three liberal justices of the court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia warned that "because of today's decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason." Justice Scalia took the rare step of reading his dissent from the bench, "signaling deep disagreement" on the Court.
See also
References
- ^ Slip opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court
- ^ "Court: Police can take DNA swabs from arrestees". Associated Press. 3 June 2013. Retrieved 3 June 2013.
- Adam Liptak (3 June 2013). "Justices Allow Police to Take DNA Samples After Arrests". The New York Times. Retrieved 3 June 2013.
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it. |