Legal Opinion
United States v. Pool
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 14, 2010No. 09-10303PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by CALLAHAN; Concurrence by Judge LUCERO; Dissent by Judge SCHROEDER.
OPINION
CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge:
Jerry Arbert Pool challenges the district court’s implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3142(b) and (c)(1)(A), requiring him to give a DNA sample as a condition of his pre-trial release. Applying the totality of the circumstances test, we affirm the district court. We hold that where a court has determined that there is probable cause to believe that the defendant committed a felony, the government’s interest in definitively determining the defendant’s identity outweighs the defendant’s privacy…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Gerstein v. PughSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. KnightsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hamilton v. BrownCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- Garcia-Torres v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 2011
- King v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2012
- United States v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.