During arguments in an important criminal case, the California Supreme Court seemed receptive to the basis for a warrant based on a DNA profile. At issue is whether an unknown suspect's DNA profile -- as opposed to a physical description -- can satisfy the particularity requirement for issuing a "John Doe" warrant, and whether such warrants toll the statute of limitations for bringing criminal charges. A third issue is whether the unlawful collection of a blood sample violates the Fourth Amendment.
November 05, 2009 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
When California Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald George advised West Hills, Calif., attorney Cara DeVito that her time was up if she wanted to save a few minutes for rebuttal during oral arguments Tuesday, she let out a soft moan.
“But I’ve got so much more to say,” she said mock sadly.
Deal Watch: Skadden, Sidley, Slaughter and S&C Lead Big Paper Deal, While Private Funds Grow Massive
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
