TN: 2009 DNA seizure that should have been purged and wasn’t could be relied on in GF and then another order issued

Defendant’s DNA was seized in 2009 and should have been purged, but it wasn’t. He’s later charged with another crime. A confirmatory test was run. The good faith exception applies to the DNA that wasn’t purged like it was supposed to be. [Doesn’t confirmation moot that?] State v. Miray, 2025 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 620 (Dec. 18, 2025).

Plaintiff fled a traffic stop after initially pulling over. That was probable cause for arrest. Parham v. Robles, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33043 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2025).*

Plaintiff’s FAC survives a motion to dismiss: “The FAC alleges that Henry and Schwering ‘violently’ detained decedent and applied a vascular neck restraint while decedent was in a prone position, and Bjornstad used body weight force on decedent. The FAC also alleges that Mr. Jaramillo ‘vomited profusely and appeared to have a seizure’ and lost consciousness, and that Defendants’ use of force caused Mr. Jaramillo’s death.” Est. of Jaramillo v. City of Spokane, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 33044 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2025).*

This entry was posted in DNA, Excessive force, Good faith exception, Probable cause. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.