State v. Police

Summary

The court held that the John Doe arrest warrant did not satisfy the Fourth Amendment's particularity requirement because it relied on vague physical descriptions and mixed partial touch-DNA profiles that were not shown to be the perpetrator's unique profile or statistically rare. Because the warrant was constitutionally deficient, it did not commence the prosecution or toll the applicable statute of limitations, and the information had to be dismissed. The court also held that the record was adequate to review the defendant's unpreserved constitutional claim because review was limited to information presented to the issuing judicial authority. No separate opinions were filed.