Opinion ID: 1749345
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Right to Privacy, Due Process, and State Constitutional Rights

Text: Appellants argue that DNA sampling violates their rights under Section 10 of the Kentucky Constitution (the state counterpart to the Fourth Amendment). In this particular case, we see no reason to interpret Section 10 differently from the Fourth Amendment. See LaFollette v. Commonwealth, 915 S.W.2d 747, 748 (Ky. 1996). But see Rainey v. Commonwealth, 197 S.W.3d 89, 95-97 (Ky.2006) (Roach, J., concurring). Appellants also argue that DNA sampling violates their privacy and due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Sections 1, 2, and 11 of the Kentucky Constitution. The Kentucky Constitution has been held to offer greater protection of the right of privacy than provided by the Federal Constitution as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. ... Commonwealth v. Wasson, 842 S.W.2d 487, 491 (1992). However, this Court has never extended this greater privacy protection to searches and seizures, and Appellants' privacy and due process claims have been adequately addressed by our discussion of the balancing of their privacy interests under the Fourth Amendment. See Colbert v. Commonwealth, 43 S.W.3d 777, 780 (Ky.2001).