Just this week, the United States Supreme Court Justices have made a decision that will affect the lives of Americans in a very distinct way. Namely, that if you are arrested for a serious criminal offense, whether or not you are guilty, the police have been given he right to take your DNA. The Supreme Court has ruled that the police officers have the right to do so by way of taking a cheek swab, and thereby entering your DNA into the government database. This court ruling was a five-justice majority vote, and those in favor stand by the belief that this is entirely within the peoples Fourth Amendment Rights addressing search and seizure. They hold to the stance that this is a completely legitimate and reasonable procedure which will be considered just another step of the "jailhouse" booking procedures that a police officer does when conducting an arrest, such as getting a finger print or taking a picture for documentation.

This new rule was a response, or a "backing up," of the laws established in Maryland in which the police were given the right to conduct a cheek swab if a person was arrested for a serious criminal offense. However, the four remaining judges that were against this ruling claims that they do not believe it will be long now before the police are given the green light to take DNA samples in the event of any type of arrest, not just serious offenses. Justice Antonin Scalia believes that as a result of Monday's decision, the police now have the authority to take your DNA and enter it into the national database in the event of an arrest. Whether or not your arrest is do so rightly or you were falsely accused of a crime, your name will be forever added in to this database. Scalia claims that while this may help with some crime solving, but the effects of having DNA collection so easy is concerning to the four opposing justices. It won't be long before the people are forced to hand over their DNA after a crime like shoplifting, a far reach when compared to a crime like rape or murder.

This case was brought to light as a result of a Maryland case, and because of the Supreme Court decision Alonzo King's rape conviction was reinstated as a result of a DNA collection that was gathered from a crime for a previous arrest, which linked him to the rape. Originally convicted for rape charges, based on the DNA which matched the victim found from a previous arrest, the Maryland court challenged the decision claiming that it was illegal for the DNA to be taken without a judge's approval. They claimed that King's rights for unreasonable search and seizure were violated because of this. However, as a result of the Supreme Court's decision to allow for the DNA collection to be taken when arrested for a serious crime, his conviction was reinstated.

While some people may feel as though the collection of DNA is a violation of rights and/or privacy, Justice Kennedy believes that this will be a useful aid for police looking to identify suspects. Kennedy claims that this process differs little to that of using a photograph to connect a crime with a person or a fingerprint. The American Civil Liberties Union disagrees with this, however. They claim that this new ruling is establishing a large gap of exceptions for rights that fall under the Fourth Amendment in which Justices had previously agreed that DNA testing without reasonable cause is a violation of that right. This laws appears too many to be in violation of this.

If you were arrested for violent or serious offense, contact a criminal defense attorney in your area!