State v. Binner

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 sample taken for one purpose cannot be used subsequently for a different purpose without offending the Fourth Amendment
• concluding that the defendant who consented to a blood draw for purposes of determining alcohol concentration did not consent to having his blood tested for drugs
• holding that, although the defendant agreed to provide a blood sample for alcohol content, his refusal to be tested for drug content preserved a privacy interest in the blood sample as to drug content
• holding that, although the defendant agreed to provide a blood sample for alcohol content, his refusal to be tested for drug content preserved a privacy interest in the blood sample as to drug content
• holding that, under the Oregon constitution, when a person consents to have their blood drawn and tested for specified substances, the scope of that consent limits the scope of the State’s power to test the blood without a warrant
• explaining that a “seizure” of property occurs when there is a significant interference with a person’s possessory interest in the property

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).