Background
David Dwayne Anderson appealed his 2022 murder conviction arising from the 1981 killing of S.Q. Investigators had preserved biological evidence from the crime scene, and later DNA analysis produced a profile of the suspected perpetrator. In 2020, genetic-genealogy analysis identified Anderson and two of his brothers as potential sources of that DNA, and investigators eventually focused on Anderson.
Acting without a warrant, a contractor working at law enforcement’s direction searched a publicly shared dumpster at Anderson’s Nebraska apartment complex and removed a soda can from a trash bag that appeared to be his. DNA recovered from the can matched the crime-scene profile. Investigators then obtained warrants to arrest Anderson and collect a buccal swab, which confirmed the match. After an initial trial ended in a hung jury, a second jury found Anderson guilty on the charged first-degree-murder theories, and the district court imposed a life sentence with discretionary parole after twenty years.
The Court’s Holding
A divided Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed. The majority held that Anderson had no reasonable expectation of privacy in garbage placed in a publicly accessible, shared dumpster outside his home’s curtilage. Because the garbage was abandoned, investigators did not need a warrant to inspect it or seize the soda can and the DNA deposited on it.
The majority further held that testing the lawfully obtained DNA solely to identify its source by comparison with an existing crime-scene profile did not violate the Fourth Amendment or article II, section 7 of the Colorado Constitution. It relied on Colorado precedent upholding Crim. P. 41.1, which permits judicially authorized collection and testing of nontestimonial identification evidence on less than probable cause. The court also concluded that the trial court properly admitted other-acts evidence and that the prosecution did not engage in reversible misconduct. Judge Kuhn specially concurred, while Judge Schutz dissented from the DNA ruling and would have reversed because investigators obtained neither a warrant nor another constitutionally sufficient judicial authorization before testing Anderson’s DNA.
Key Takeaways
- A person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in trash left in a publicly accessible shared dumpster outside the home’s curtilage.
- Under the majority’s narrow holding, police may test DNA found on lawfully obtained abandoned property without a warrant when the testing is limited to identification.
- The decision does not resolve whether warrantless DNA testing for medical information, database creation, or purposes beyond identification would be constitutional.
Why It Matters
The decision applies abandonment doctrine to modern forensic DNA investigations and permits law enforcement to use discarded genetic material for identification without first obtaining a warrant. That rule may be especially consequential in cold cases developed through genetic genealogy.
The separate opinions underscore the unresolved privacy concerns created by genetic testing. The dissent maintained that Coloradans retain a reasonable privacy expectation in genetic material inevitably left on discarded objects, while the special concurrence urged legislative attention to protecting genetic information.