District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne | Definition

Doc's CJ Glossary by Adam J. McKee
Course: Procedural Law

District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne is a 2009 United States Supreme Court case that addressed the issue of whether DNA testing can be performed on a convicted person’s biological samples without the person’s consent. The case arose when William Osborne, a convicted Alaska sex offender, requested DNA testing on evidence that had been collected during his trial. The state of Alaska argued that the testing could be performed without Osborne’s consent, but Osborne argued that the testing would violate his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Osborne and held that DNA testing on a convicted person’s biological samples without the person’s consent does indeed violate the Fourth Amendment. The Court held that DNA testing is a significant intrusion into a person’s privacy and that it is not reasonable for the government to perform such testing without the person’s consent. The decision in District Attorney’s Office v. Osborne has important implications for the use of DNA evidence in the criminal justice system.


Learn More

On This Site


[ Glossary ]

Last Modified: 01/09/2023

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Professor McKee's Things and Stuff uses Accessibility Checker to monitor our website's accessibility.