Printer Friendly

U.S. v. Stegman.

U.S. District Court

DNA

U.S. v. Stegman, 295 F.Supp.2d 542 (D.Md. 2003). The government filed a notice of violation of conditions of supervised release after an offender refused to comply with a probation officer's order to submit a blood specimen pursuant to the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act. The offender moved to dismiss the case and the district court denied the motion. The court held that the application of the Act did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause, did not violate the Fourth Amendment, did not violate the separation of powers doctrine, and did not violate the offender's double jeopardy rights. (Maryland)
COPYRIGHT 2004 CRS, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2004, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:offender submitting blood specimen and violation of 4th amendment rights
Publication:Corrections Caselaw Quarterly
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1U5MD
Date:Nov 1, 2004
Words:108
Previous Article:Padgett v. Ferrero.
Next Article:Demery v. Arpaio.
Topics:


Related Articles
U.S. Appeals Court: PAROLE EX POST FACTO.
Jones v. Blanas.
Odenwalt v. Gillis.
U.S. v. Stegman.
Odenwalt v. Gillis.
Hatton v. Bonner.
Donhauser v. Goord.
Pelland v. Rhode Island.
Habeas corpus.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters