Pre-Conviction DNA Collection Unconstitutional in Vermont
Pre-Conviction DNA Collection Unconstitutional in Vermont
Holding that the Vermont Constitution affords greater protections than the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution from unconstitutional search and seizures, on July 11, 2014, the Supreme Court of Vermont held that the most recent amendment to Vermont’s DNA-database statute is unconstitutional.
As of July 2011, the amended statute, 20 V.S.A. § 1933(a)(2), mandated warrantless, suspicionless DNA collection and analysis from anyone arraigned for a felony. Looking to uphold the statute’s validity, the State relied on the United States Supreme Court holding in Maryland v. King, 133 S. Ct. 1958 (U.S. 2013). In Maryland v. King, the U.S. Supreme Court “decided that a similar Maryland statute — one that authorized warrantless, suspicionless DNA collection from persons arrested for violent crimes or burglary — is constitutional under the Fourth Amendment.”
The Vermont Supreme Court identified two reasons why the Vermont case is different than King:
(1) The Vermont statute sufficiently differs from the Maryland statute involved in King and produces a different result under the Fourth Amendment; and
(2)The heightened standards and requirements of Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution compel a different result.
The Court concluded, “The marginal weight of the State's interest in DNA collection at the point of arraignment, balanced against the weight of the privacy interest retained by arraignees prior to conviction, persuades us to hold that 20 V.S.A. § 1933(a)(2), and associated sections, which expand the DNA-sample requirement to defendants charged with qualifying crimes for which probable cause is found, violate Chapter I, Article 11 of the Vermont Constitution.” See: State v. Medina, 2014 VT 69 (Vt. 2014).
Related legal case
State v. Medina
| Year | 2014 |
|---|---|
| Cite | 2014 VT 69 (Vt. 2014) |
| Level | State Supreme Court |