People v. Foster
290 Ill. Dec. 421, 821 N.E.2d 733, 354 Ill. App. 3d 564 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A state statute requiring convicted felons to submit a DNA sample for a state database does not violate the Fourth Amendment because the state's legitimate interests in deterring crime and identifying offenders outweigh the felon's diminished expectation of privacy.
Facts:
- On June 14, 2002, Officer Scott Korhonen was conducting surveillance in Chicago when he observed the defendant shouting 'rocks' to passersby.
- Korhonen witnessed the defendant engage in what appeared to be hand-to-hand drug transactions with several individuals, including a man named Mark Geyer.
- As Officer Korhonen approached, Geyer dropped a bag containing a white, rock-like substance to the ground.
- Korhonen arrested the defendant and Geyer and recovered the bag, which was later confirmed to contain 0.1 gram of cocaine.
- It was determined that the transaction took place 580 feet from the New Hope Church.
- Following his conviction, the defendant was ordered by the court to submit a DNA sample for a state database, pursuant to section 5–4–3(a)(3.5) of the Unified Code of Corrections.
Procedural Posture:
- The defendant was tried in a bench trial in the circuit court for unlawful delivery of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a church.
- The trial court found the defendant guilty.
- The defendant was sentenced to six years in prison and ordered to submit a DNA sample pursuant to the state statute.
- The defendant filed a motion to reconsider or for a new trial, which the trial court denied.
- The defendant (appellant) appealed his conviction and the DNA collection order to the Illinois Appellate Court, arguing insufficiency of the evidence, improper chain of custody, and that the DNA statute was unconstitutional.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an Illinois statute that mandates convicted felons submit a DNA sample for a state databank violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures?
Opinions:
Majority - Presiding Justice Cahill
No. The Illinois statute mandating that convicted felons submit a DNA sample for a state databank does not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures. The court determines the constitutionality of the statute by applying a Fourth Amendment balancing test, which weighs the promotion of legitimate governmental interests against the individual's expectation of privacy. The State has a strong and legitimate interest in deterring and prosecuting recidivist criminal acts, solving past and future crimes, and establishing the identity of felons. Conversely, a convicted felon possesses a diminished expectation of privacy compared to a free citizen. The court concludes that the minimal physical intrusion of a blood draw is outweighed by the State's significant interests. Therefore, the compulsory DNA collection from convicted felons is a reasonable search and is constitutional.
Analysis:
This decision aligns Illinois appellate courts with a national trend upholding the constitutionality of mandatory DNA collection from convicted felons. By employing the general Fourth Amendment 'balancing test' rather than the more narrow 'special needs' doctrine, the court establishes a broader foundation for analyzing post-conviction searches. This precedent reinforces the legal principle that convicted individuals have significantly reduced privacy rights, particularly concerning their identity. The ruling solidifies the government's authority to use modern biometric technology for law enforcement purposes and may influence future cases concerning other forms of data collection from convicted persons.
Unlock the full brief for People v. Foster