United States v. Thomas
815 F. Supp. 2d 384
D. Me.2011Background
- DNA profile obtained from 2005 grand jury subpoena in Madawaska, Maine, used to investigate 2004 mailings; 2005 saliva sample collected by postal inspector; DNA profile kept by Cellmark but missing one page later recovered; 2010-2011 threats led to new warrants and arrest; defendant indicted in 2011 for 2010 crimes and felon-in-possession; defendant moves to suppress the 2005 DNA and related evidence and statements; court weighs whether exclusionary rule applies to this unrelated, later prosecution; court finds no automatic exclusion under Herring framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2005 DNA via grand jury subpoena is suppressible in 2011 case | Government argues exclusionary rule not applicable | Thomas argues Fourth Amendment violation taints later evidence | Denied: exclusionary rule does not require suppression |
Key Cases Cited
- Dionisio, 410 U.S. 1 (Classical U.S. Supreme Court decision) (grand jury subpoenas can obtain handwriting exemplars and fingerprints)
- Mara, 410 U.S. 19 (Classical U.S. Supreme Court decision) (DNA/biological material not treated like ordinary documents in all contexts; subpoena powers)
- Herring v. United States, 555 U.S. 135 (2009) (exclusion not automatic; deterrence balancing of police malfeasance)
- U.S. v. Clariot, 655 F.3d 550 (6th Cir. 2011) (exclusionary rule and deterrence considerations for police conduct)
- Santucci, 674 F.2d 624 (7th Cir. 1982) (latitude given to AUSA in grand jury subpoena use)
- In re Vickers, 38 F. Supp. 2d 159 (D.N.H. 1998) (grand jury subpoena standard of review for scope/subject matter)