|Abstract||DNA plays an indispensable role in modern law enforcement, and courts uniformly find that DNA extraction statutes targeting criminals satisfy the Fourth Amendment. Courts differ on which Fourth Amendment test -- totality of the circumstances or special needs -- ought to be employed in this context. This Note concludes that courts should apply Samson v. California's less stringent totality of the circumstances test to analyze DNA extraction statutes in order to maintain the integrity of the special needs test.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
David B. Resnik (2001). DNA Patents and Scientific Discovery and Innovation: Assessing Benefits and Risks. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (1):29-62.
Dan Fenske, All Enemies, Foreign and Domestic: Erasing the Distinction Between Foreign and Domestic Intelligence Gathering Under the Fourth Amendment.
Dorie Klein, Unreasonable: Involuntary Medications, Incompetent Criminal Defendants, and the Fourth Amendment.
Dolores A. Donovan, Informers Revisited: Government Surveillance of Domestic Political Organizations and the Fourth and First Amendments.
Jasper A. Bovenberg (2006). Property Rights in Blood, Genes and Data: Naturally Yours? Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Tracey Maclin (2005). Is Obtaining an Arrestee's DNA a Valid Special Needs Search Under the Fourth Amendment? What Should (and Will) the Supreme Court Do? Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (1):102-124.
Holly K. Fernandez (2005). Genetic Privacy, Abandonment, and DNA Dragnets: Is Fourth Amendment Jurisprudence Adequate? Hastings Center Report 35 (1):21-23.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #41,549 of 556,772 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,754 of 556,772 )
How can I increase my downloads?