Commonwealth v. Carter, N.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that in addition to the Fifth Amendment, there also is no legitimate Fourth Amendment interest violated by the compulsory production of characteristics exposed to the public
• ruling that “[hjandwriting, like speech, is repeatedly shown to the public, and there is no more expectation of privacy in the physical characteristics of a person’s script than there is in the tone of his voice.”
• handwriting samples may be taken from an unwilling suspect without running afoul of the self-incrimination privilege
• requiring grand jury witness to provide handwriting exemplars for grand jury’s observation is not a search of person
• “Handwriting, like speech, is repeatedly shown to the public, and there is no more expectation of privacy in the physical characteristics of a person’s script than there is in the tone of his voice.”
• taking handwriting exemplar not a search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).