(Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider whether a state may collect DNA samples from people who are arrested but not yet convicted of violent crimes, in a case that may have national implications for law enforcement. <\/p>\n
Maryland is appealing an April 24 decision by the state Court of Appeals overturning the 2010 conviction and life sentence of Alonzo Jay King for a rape committed seven years earlier, and prior to his 2009 arrest for assault. <\/p>\n
A DNA sample taken following that arrest without a warrant had linked him to the earlier crime. <\/p>\n
In overturning King's conviction, the Maryland appeals court said the state's DNA Collection Act violated the ban on unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. <\/p>\n
That Maryland law lets police take DNA samples from people arrested for violent crimes, attempted violent crimes, burglary and attempted burglary. <\/p>\n
In July, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts put that lower court ruling on hold, allowing the law to remain in effect, while Maryland appealed the King case. <\/p>\n
Roberts said at the time that there was a \"fair prospect\" that the Supreme Court would reverse the ruling, and that the ruling subjected Maryland to \"irreparable harm.\" <\/p>\n
The chief justice said the court of appeals ruling conflicted with three other courts that had upheld laws similar to Maryland's DNA collection law. <\/p>\n
He also said the appeals court ruling had national implications because it would, if upheld, prevent the FBI from getting the samples for a national database. <\/p>\n
Collecting DNA samples \"implicates an important feature of day-to-day law enforcement practice\" in half of all U.S. states and the federal government, Roberts said. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n
See the original post: (Reuters) - The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to consider whether a state may collect DNA samples from people who are arrested but not yet convicted of violent crimes, in a case that may have national implications for law enforcement. Continue reading
\nSupreme Court takes up DNA and sentencing cases<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"