Assessing Fourth Amendment challenges to DNA extraction statutes after Samson v. California.

IF 1 3区社会学 Q2 LAW

Fordham Law Review Pub Date : 2008-11-01

Charles J Nerko

引用次数: 0

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.

本刊更多论文

评估萨姆森诉加州案后第四修正案对DNA提取法规的挑战。

DNA在现代执法中发挥着不可或缺的作用，法院一致认为，针对罪犯的DNA提取法规符合第四修正案。在这种情况下，法院对第四修正案的标准——总体情况还是特殊需要——应该采用哪一种存在分歧。本说明的结论是，法院应应用Samson诉California案中较不严格的总体情况测试来分析DNA提取法规，以保持特殊需要测试的完整性。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Fordham Law Review LAW-

CiteScore

1.10

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Fordham Law Review is a scholarly journal serving the legal profession and the public by discussing current legal issues. Approximately 75 articles, written by students or submitted by outside authors, are published each year. Each volume comprises six books, three each semester, totaling over 3,000 pages. Managed by a board of up to eighteen student editors, the Law Review is a working journal, not merely an honor society. Nevertheless, Law Review membership is considered among the highest scholarly achievements at the Law School.