CA Court of Appeals, 1st District: DNA and Forensic Identification 295, to the extent it requires felony arrestees to submit a DNA sample for law enforcement analysis and inclusion in the state and federal DNA databases, without independent suspicion, a warrant or even a judicial or grand jury determination of probable cause, unreasonably intrudes on such arrestees’ expectation of privacy and is invalid under the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. THE PEOPLE v. MARK BUZA, A125542 (August 04, 2011). In support the court stated:
Because “[t]he interests in human dignity and privacy which the Fourth Amendment protects forbid any such intrusion on the mere chance that desired evidence might be obtained” (Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966)), “the mere fact that law enforcement may be made more efficient can never by itself justify disregard of the Fourth Amendment” (Mincey v. Arizona, 437 U.S. 385, 393 (1978); Arizona v. Gant 129 S.Ct. 1710, 1723(2009).
The DNA and Forensic Identification 295 et Data Base and Data Bank Act of 1998, as requires that a DNA sample be taken from all adults arrested for or charged with any felony offense “immediately following arrest, or during the booking, process or as soon as administratively practicable after arrest.
For the full opinion see: THE PEOPLE v. MARK BUZA.