My hero: Fat Tony

[pscot]

Kennedy wrote the decision, and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer. Scalia was joined in his dissent by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2013/06/03/supreme-court-rules-police-can-take-dna-samples-from-arrestees/g4ZnVgNF7Y8LJgraj4NuTM/story.html

[Shrike47]

1. At least for today. Normally, Scalia is WRONGO.

[Savannahmann]

2. I've thought of this before

There are issues in which the strict conservatives and we should be able to agree upon. For us, the argument is one of right to privacy, and overreaching police powers. For the strict conservatives, the issue would be the strict interpretation of the constitution.

We are both right, the police could have done the DNA sample with a warrant, and all would have been peachy keen. But instead they decided it was normal procedure. Now, it is, because five people think it is.

That's what makes me sick, when we take an abuse, an excessive action, and make it normal after the fact.

[DevonRex]

3. It was a Maryland law for police to collect DNA upon arrest for violent felonies.

It's really interesting. And actually in this particular case I would have upheld his conviction based on that DNA. The arresting officers have no clue what some lawyer is gonna get a DA to let the guy plead down to. And DNA is done at arrest, same as fingerprinting. Two short paragraphs sum it up very well. You'll enjoy it.


"In the case before the court, a 53-year-old woman was raped and robbed but no one was arrested. Almost six years later, Alonzo King was arrested and charged with felony second-degree assault. Taking advantage of the Maryland law that allowed warrantless DNA tests following some felony arrests, police took a cheek swab of King’s DNA, which matched a sample from the 2003 Salisbury rape. King was convicted of rape and sentenced to life in prison.

King eventually pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of misdemeanor assault from his arrest, a crime for which Maryland cannot take warrantless DNA samples. The state courts said it violated King’s rights for the state to take his DNA based on an arrest alone. The state Court of Appeals said King had ‘‘a sufficiently weighty and reasonable expectation of privacy against warrantless, suspicionless searches.’’ But the high court’s decision reinstates King’s conviction."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2013/06/03/supreme-court-rules-police-can-take-dna-samples-from-arrestees/g4ZnVgNF7Y8LJgraj4NuTM/story.html

[Savannahmann]

4. Ah there be the rub

First, the police know that the charges will almost certainly be plea bargained down. They arrest people knowing that, which is why they tack on so many process charges. Unless you own your own handcuffs, and upon seeing the police, throw them on your own wrists, and start walking to the police car, the claim resisting arrest is tacked on. If you ask what for when they announce you are under arrest, that is resisting to the arresting officer.

If you are in a bar, and a disagreement breaks out, and you end up in a fight, possible certainly given the circumstances. Then the charge is felony assault. The charge is felony assault despite the fact that it will be dropped to misdemeanor disturbing the peace in most instances.

Go to court, sit for a day, watch the proceedings. Especially the smaller courts. I watched one case dropped to disturbing the peace after the guy slashed two police car tires. From felony destruction of public property to disturbing the peace, and the guy didn't have a lawyer present. A hundred hours of community service and a fine equal to the price of the tires, and he was out of there.

The police know when they arrest someone that the charges will almost inevitably be dropped down, so the argument that any felony arrest is enough cause to get DNA is bogus. Because most arrests are felony, and most convictions are misdemeanors. The cops know if they arrest you for a misdemeanor, that the charge will be dropped to an infraction, or dismissed altogether.

[DevonRex]

5. But you and I both know

that is because of factors that have nothing to do with what crime was actually committed. Which is why the Maryland law was written as it was.

Plea deals have to do with overcrowded court dockets, unavailability of public defenders, overcrowding of jails and, ultimately, overcrowding of prisons. The eventual plea deal never matches the seriousness of the offense unless the bargain was life imprisonment to take the death penalty off the table.