Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Paul KELLOGG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Brion D. TRAVIS, etc., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Braun, J.), entered May 24, 2001, which, in an action seeking, inter alia, declaratory relief, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a), unanimously modified, on the law, to declare in defendants' favor that the State DNA Databank Law is constitutional to the extent challenged, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff was convicted of two violent felonies in 1994. His claim, that the DNA Databank Law (Executive Law § 995 through § 995-f), as amended in 1999 (L. 1999, ch. 560 § 1 and § 9), which requires him, by reason of his commission of the aforementioned felonies and subsequent length of imprisonment, to submit a sample of his DNA to the State DNA Databank, constitutes after-the-fact imposition of additional punishment for those felonies, in violation of the Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution (see Collins v. Youngblood, 497 U.S. 37, 42-43, 110 S.Ct. 2715, 111 L.Ed.2d 30), is without merit. The requirement that an individual submit to DNA testing does not, when effected by a law such as New York's DNA Databank Law, whose overall intent is manifestly nonpunitive, constitute punishment (see Rise v. State of Oregon, 59 F.3d 1556, 1562, cert. denied 517 U.S. 1160, 116 S.Ct. 1554, 134 L.Ed.2d 656). We modify only to make the necessary declaration in defendants' favor (see Lanza v. Wagner, 11 N.Y.2d 317, 334, 229 N.Y.S.2d 380, 183 N.E.2d 670).
We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 31, 2002
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)