This browser does not support the Video element.
Allison Feldman murder: AZ court rules on DNA case
A ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court on Dec. 17 could change the way the state prosecutes murder cases. The ruling involves the Allison Feldman murder case, where the suspect, Ian Mitcham, was matched to DNA evidence via a rather unorthodox way. FOX 10's Lindsey Ragas reports.
PHOENIX - The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that DNA evidence can be used in the murder case of Allison Feldman.
Feldman was found dead in her Scottsdale home in 2015.
Ian Mitcham was arrested for Feldman's murder after investigators say they matched DNA from the crime scene to Mitcham's brother, who was in prison. Police then used a sample of Mitcham's DNA from a 2015 DUI arrest to put him at the murder scene.
Last year, just before the case was set to go to trial, a judge tossed out the DNA evidence. The defense argued that using the sample violated Mitcham's Fourth Amendment rights because he didn't consent to it being used, and it was supposed to have been destroyed.
The Arizona Court of Appeals later reversed that decision, which led to an appeal to the state supreme court.
In September, the state supreme court heard arguments from both sides on the DNA evidence.
Allison Feldman murder case: AZ Supreme Court hears arguments on DNA evidence
During a hearing on Sept. 26, the state supreme court heard arguments on evidence used in the Allison Feldman murder case, which was the first time familial DNA was used by police to link a suspect to a crime.
Supreme court issues opinion in case
"The case arose after Mitcham was arrested for DUI and consented to a blood test to determine alcohol concentration or drug content. Years later, while investigating Feldman’s murder, police suspected Mitcham’s involvement and used the previously collected blood sample to sequence a DNA profile, which linked Mitcham to the crime scene. The DNA sequencing was conducted without a warrant, leading to legal challenges regarding the constitutionality of the search.
The Supreme Court reversed the superior court and sent the case back to that court for trial. The Court found that the warrantless sequencing of DNA from Mitcham’s blood violated his Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. But the Court held because the police would have discovered the DNA evidence through lawful means untainted by the illegal search, the prosecution should not be precluded from introducing that evidence at trial.
The Court’s decision clarifies important issues regarding law enforcement’s ability to search evidence already in its possession and the meaning of the "inevitable discovery" exception to the general rule precluding the prosecution from using illegally obtained evidence at trial."