Maryland v. King

Oral argument

• Argued

  61 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a DNA collection scheme was constitutional in part because state statute regulated how records could be used
• holding that validly-arrested defendant’s right to privacy was not offended when police swabbed for and analyzed his DNA as part of routine booking procedure
• holding that a state law requiring arrestees to provide a buccal swab is “a reasonable search that can be considered part of a routine booking procedure”
• holding that taking and analyzing a cheek swab of a validly-arrested person’s DNA is “a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment”
• holding that a warrant is not required to take and analyze a cheek swab of an arrestee’s DNA “when officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense”
• concluding that “noncoding parts of the DNA … do not reveal the genetic traits of the arrestee” and the testing of that noncoding DNA does “not amount to a significant invasion of privacy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).