Az Supreme Court Decides Illegally Obtained DNA Evidence Would Have Been Found Anyway

The Arizona Supreme Court issued a significant ruling on Tuesday, determining that DNA evidence obtained from a murder suspect’s blood sample can still be used in court, despite a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. The unanimous decision affects the case against Ian Mitcham, charged with the 2015 murder of Allison Feldman in Scottsdale. Feldman was killed in her home, suffering blunt force trauma to her head following a sexual assault.

The investigation into Feldman’s murder began with a focus on Mitcham after Scottsdale police analyzed his blood sample, which had been collected during a DUI arrest a month prior to the murder. In 2018, detectives sought to identify familial connections to the DNA left at the crime scene, eventually leading them back to Mitcham through his incarcerated brother.

This case marks the first instance in Arizona where familial DNA played a pivotal role in identifying a suspect. Mitcham had given consent for the blood draw relevant to alcohol testing and was under the impression that any unused samples would be destroyed within 90 days. However, police did not follow through with this promise and conducted an analysis of the DNA without obtaining a new warrant, a move that violated Mitcham’s constitutional rights.

Chief Justice Ann Timmer clarified that while Mitcham relinquished some possessory rights over the blood sample, he retained certain privacy rights. The justices emphasized that creating a DNA profile counts as a separate search that necessitates its own warrant. Nevertheless, they ruled the evidence admissible under the “inevitable discovery” doctrine. This legal principle holds that the evidence would have ultimately been uncovered due to Mitcham’s felony convictions, which required him to submit a DNA sample under Arizona law.

The decision compels law enforcement to secure warrants before analyzing stored biological samples, yet it delineates circumstances where exceptions can apply. “The key inquiry is whether verifiable facts exist from which the court can find that the evidence would have been lawfully discovered,” Timmer noted.

Mitcham’s indictment includes first-degree murder, second-degree burglary, and sexual assault charges. Although initial rulings had suppressed the DNA evidence, the recent judgment reinstates its admissibility, thereby allowing prosecutors to utilize it in court.

The ruling arrives amidst a national dialogue over privacy issues related to DNA technology and expanding genetic databases. Arizona’s Supreme Court analysis seeks to establish a balance between individual privacy rights and law enforcement’s pursuit of justice as technology continues to evolve. The case will return to Maricopa Superior Court for continued proceedings, with Mitcham remaining in custody.