Fingerprints And Biometrics
What Are Biometrics
Biometrics refers to unique physical or behavioral characteristics used to identify individuals. Common types include:
Fingerprints: The patterns of ridges and valleys on fingertips, unique to each person.
Facial recognition: Identifying individuals by facial features.
Iris scans: Patterns in the colored part of the eye.
Voice recognition
DNA (sometimes considered biometric in forensic contexts).
Use in Law Enforcement
Identification of suspects.
Verification of identity in custody or border control.
Evidence in criminal trials.
Automated biometric systems (e.g., AFIS – Automated Fingerprint Identification System) help match crime scene prints with databases.
Key Legal Issues with Biometrics and Fingerprints
Privacy and Fourth Amendment: Is collecting biometrics a search requiring a warrant?
Reliability and Scientific Validity: How accurate is biometric evidence? Risk of errors.
Consent: Can law enforcement compel biometric data collection?
Chain of Custody and Handling: Ensuring biometric evidence is not contaminated or falsified.
Important Case Laws on Fingerprints and Biometrics
1. Maryland v. King (2013)
Facts: The police took a DNA swab from Henry King, arrested for assault. King argued this violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure.
Issue: Is collecting DNA from arrestees a search requiring a warrant, or is it permissible as part of routine booking procedures like fingerprinting?
Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that taking DNA samples from individuals arrested for serious crimes is constitutional, comparing it to fingerprinting and photographing.
Significance: DNA collection is considered a legitimate part of the arrest process to identify suspects, similar to fingerprinting, balancing law enforcement interests with privacy.
2. United States v. Kincade (9th Cir. 2009)
Facts: Kincade challenged the government’s retention of his DNA profile in a database long after his conviction.
Issue: Does storing a DNA profile violate privacy rights when a person has served their sentence?
Ruling: The court held that once DNA is collected legally (e.g., after conviction), the government can retain it without violating the Fourth Amendment.
Significance: Highlights ongoing privacy concerns in biometric databases even post-conviction.
3. People v. Wesley (New York, 2016)
Facts: Wesley challenged the admissibility of fingerprint evidence, arguing the fingerprint match was unreliable due to potential human error.
Issue: How reliable is fingerprint evidence and what standard applies?
Ruling: The court reaffirmed the admissibility of fingerprint evidence but required expert testimony about the method’s reliability and error rates.
Significance: Shows courts demand scientific scrutiny of biometric evidence and transparency about error rates.
4. Florida v. Jardines (2013) – Relevant to Biometric Search
Facts: Police used a drug-sniffing dog on Jardines’ porch without a warrant to detect marijuana.
Issue: Does the use of a drug-sniffing dog at the home constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment?
Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled it was a search, requiring probable cause and a warrant.
Significance: Though about drug detection, this case influences biometrics collection at private property (e.g., facial recognition or biometric scanning devices) requiring proper legal authorization.
5. Carpenter v. United States (2018) – Digital Biometrics & Privacy
Facts: Police accessed Carpenter’s cellphone location data without a warrant.
Issue: Does accessing digital data (including biometrics like facial recognition on phones) require a warrant under the Fourth Amendment?
Ruling: The Court ruled that accessing such digital data is a search requiring a warrant.
Significance: Sets precedent that biometric data stored digitally (like fingerprints on phones) is protected and can’t be accessed without proper legal process.
Summary of Biometric Evidence in Law
| Aspect | Legal Considerations | Cases Referenced |
|---|---|---|
| Collection at Arrest | Permissible as routine booking (DNA & prints) | Maryland v. King |
| Data Retention | Government can keep biometric data post-conviction | United States v. Kincade |
| Reliability | Courts require proof of accuracy and error rates | People v. Wesley |
| Search Warrants | Biometric searches at home/property require warrants | Florida v. Jardines, Carpenter v. US |
| Digital Biometric Data | Protected under Fourth Amendment, warrant needed | Carpenter v. United States |
RELATED Blog
comments