2004) (en banc), is a case of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dealing with the constitutionality of collecting and retaining DNA from parolees.

[2] Because of an armed robbery conviction, Thomas Cameron Kincade was sentenced to 97 months imprisonment.

First, because Fourth Amendment is involved, the "reasonableness in all the circumstances of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen's personal security."

Reasonableness is inexorably tied to whether government complied with the Warrant Clause, which is predicated on probable cause.

[2] This is because average law-abiding citizens' expectation of privacy is greater than those who have conditional releases; the latter is more restricted.

[2] The plurality rejects the dissent's argument that this sets into motion an Orwellian 1984 scenario where everyone could potentially be required to submit to a DNA test.

[2] The issue is really, should be government allowed to exploit what it obtained at one period for the rest of Kincade's life?

[2] Although the Supreme Court has not ruled on the issue, the other federal circuits held DNA databases do not violate the Fourth Amendment.