Johnson, Lamar v. Quander, Paul A.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that accessing an individual’s stored DNA records after the individual has completed his sentence is not a search for Fourth Amendment purposes
• concluding that plaintiffs appeal of his due process claims were “without merit and do not warrant separate discussion”
• listing cases from the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits
• “[A]ccessing the DNA snapshots contained in the CODIS database does not independently implicate the Fourth Amendment.”
• affirming grant of motion to dismiss Fourth Amendment challenge to future use of DNA sample, reasoning that “[n]othing in the record suggests such future testing is imminent, nor can we analyze its invasiveness until it appears”
• Act helps “solve past and future crimes,” in furtherance of government’s “duty ... to protect the public”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).