U.S. Supreme Court Rules Police Can Collect DNA Samples Without Warrants

Many of the states in the U.S. have laws permitting police officers to take DNA samples from people that police have arrested. Many see taking such samples as violating people’s constitutional rights. However, on June 3, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion upholding state and federal government’s’ right to collect DNA samples from those arrested for, but not convicted of, a criminal offense.

Upholding DNA Sampling of Arrestees

The case came before the Court as the result of a man’s 2009 conviction for a 2003 rape. He was arrested for felony assault charges, and in accordance with state law, police took a sample of his DNA when they processed him. When they ran the DNA through their database, it matched a DNA sample collected in an unsolved rape case from 2003. Authorities brought charges against the man for the rape, and the man moved to suppress the DNA sample at trial. He argued that the collection of his DNA without a warrant violated his Fourth Amendment rights protecting him from unreasonable searches and seizures, and that the state law allowing such collections was unconstitutional.

The trial court held that the law was constitutional and allowed the DNA sample in the trial. The man was convicted, but the Court of Appeals set aside the conviction and ruled that parts of the DNA collection law were unconstitutional. The state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and the federal government; many of the states filed supporting briefs in the case.

In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that the value of the public policy of routine DNA sampling far outweighed the minimal intrusion into privacy that taking a cheek swab for a DNA sample caused. The Court likened it to collecting fingerprints of suspects upon arrest, another way for police to confirm the identities of those in custody.

Privacy Violations?

The dissenting opinion raised several criticisms of the practice of routine DNA collection of those arrested for crimes, echoed by privacy advocates. Many are troubled by routine DNA collection because it is not just a way of identifying those whom the police have arrested, it is also a way for police to link people to crimes other than the ones for which police arrested them – as happened in the case before the Court. In effect, such DNA samples allow for warrantless, suspicionless searches.

Privacy advocates are also concerned about DNA collection of those not convicted of crimes, as DNA provides much more information about a person than a fingerprint does.

Orlando Criminal Defense Lawyers Protect Your Rights

Florida has joined the list of states that require law enforcement to take DNA samples from anyone charged with a felony and certain misdemeanors. The United States Supreme Court has basically given police free range to take DNA samples of anyone in their custody. If you have been arrested for any criminal offense in Orlando, the skilled attorneys at The Umansky Law Firm will work diligently to protect your constitutional rights.

We strongly believe that everyone deserves a second chance. We have former prosecutors who have tried hundreds of cases in Florida courtrooms to provide a unique advantage that many other firms cannot offer their clients. Having this background knowledge provides an inside look into how the prosecution will approach a case. We strive to reach negotiations that allow you to obtain the best outcome.

Call 407-228-3838 for a free case review or contact us online. We have over 100 years of combined criminal law experience and look forward to serving you.

Recent Criminal
Case Results

Grand Theft ($300-$5000)

Nolle Prosequi-Case Dropped

CT-Driving Under the Influence Car (M1)

Nolle Prosequi - Case Dropped

CT- Driving under the influence car

Nolle Prosequi - Case Dropped

Grand Theft Third Degree

Adjudicated Guilty; One day jail/one day time serve; Restitution fees; Court Cost

Petit Theft < 300

We negotiated an agreement that entailed the State dropping the charge after our client completed a Pre-Trial Diversion Program. The Charge was dropped via a Nolle Prosequi.

Unlawful Speeding

Withhold of Adjudication; No points on license; Paid fine and clerk cost; 8 hour aggressive driver class; 90 days to satisfy fine and class

Shoot/Throw Missile Into Dwell/Struct/Veh; Child Abuse; Criminal Mischief; Battery (Domestic Violence)

No Information Notice - Charges Dropped

Attach Tag/Lic Plate To Unassigned Vehicle (M2)

Nolle Prosequi - Case Dropped

DUI with Minor In Car or BAL of .20 or Higher

Pled No Contest, 1 Year Probation, 10 day Car Impound, Community Service

Motion to Modify Probation

Motion Granted in 48 hours

Petit Theft

Adjudication Withheld, 4 Months probation, Costs/Fines, Impulse Control Class

Petit Theft of $100 or MORE (M1)

Nolle Prosequi

Refuse To Submit To DUI Test (M1)

Case Dropped

Battery on Law Enforcement Officer (F3); Disorderly Conduct (M2)

Nolle Prosequi - Case Dropped


Charges Dropped

Scheme to Defraud(F3); Grand Theft(F3)

Motion to Terminate Probation Granted

Unlawful Speed


Failed to Yield at Intersection

Not Guilty

Leave Scene Of A Crash W/Property Damage (M2)

Case Dropped

Motion to Modify and Impose a Withhold of Adjudication


Attempted Burglary of a Conveyance

Charges dropped

Possession of Cannabis (less than 20 grams)

Charges dropped


Reduced to reckless driving

Possession of Alcohol Under the Age of 21

Charges dropped

Driving Under the Influence

Reduced to Reckless Driving

Violation of Probation

Case Dismissed

More Cases

Recent Personal
Injury Settlements


Scooter Accident


Car Accident


Car Accident


Government Liability Case


Back Injury

More Settlements