Patane Prevents Suppression of DNA Evidence
U.S. v. Phillips,--- F.3d ----, 2006 WL 3307270 (10th Cir. November 15, 2006)
Following U.S. v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004),which holds that evidence that is the fruit of a voluntary statement should not be suppressed even if the statement was elicited without a Miranda warning, the 10th held that physical evidence–results of a DNA swab taken pursuant to a search warrant--obtained as fruit of a voluntary statement by a defendant to a law-enforcement officer (Defendant’s statement linking himself to a robbery was used to support search warrant application) is admissible at trial regardless of whether the officer gave the defendant Miranda warnings. Defendant never argued his statement was involuntary.
Following U.S. v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004),which holds that evidence that is the fruit of a voluntary statement should not be suppressed even if the statement was elicited without a Miranda warning, the 10th held that physical evidence–results of a DNA swab taken pursuant to a search warrant--obtained as fruit of a voluntary statement by a defendant to a law-enforcement officer (Defendant’s statement linking himself to a robbery was used to support search warrant application) is admissible at trial regardless of whether the officer gave the defendant Miranda warnings. Defendant never argued his statement was involuntary.
posted by Anonymous at 11:17 AM
<< Home