Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

Matter of Welfare of Z.P.B

474 N.W.2d 651 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Matter of Welfare of Z.P.B

4 Citing cases

  1. Miller v. United States Parole Comm'n

    Case No. 02-4073-JAR (D. Kan. Apr. 25, 2003)

    Unless plaintiff can actually show that the government is using the sample for some ulterior purpose, there is no justiciable controversy. Boling, 101 F.3d at 1341 (citing In re Welfare of Z.P.B., 474 N.W.2d 651, 653-54 (Minn.Ct.App. 1991). D. Class Certification

  2. Miller v. U.S. Parole Comm'n

    259 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (D. Kan. 2003)   Cited 24 times
    Holding Patriot Act's DNA provision constitutional under special needs analysis

    Unless plaintiff can actually show that the government is using the sample for some ulterior purpose, there is no justiciable controversy.Boling, 101 F.3d at 1341 (citing In re Welfare of Z.P.B., 474 N.W.2d 651, 653-54 (Minn.Ct.App. 1991)). D. Class Certification

  3. In re Welfare of M.L.M.

    813 N.W.2d 26 (Minn. 2012)   Cited 14 times
    Noting that, in the context of a search and seizure, the totality-of-the-circumstances test "balances the State's interests against the intrusion into an individual's privacy"

    Previously, the court of appeals addressed the interaction of the general policy of juvenile confidentiality and Minn.Stat. § 609.3461 (1990) (renumbered in 1999 as section 609.117), which required a juvenile to provide a biological specimen when the juvenile was adjudicated delinquent of certain enumerated offenses. In re the Welfare of Z.P.B., 474 N.W.2d 651, 654 (Minn.App.1991). The court of appeals concluded that confidentiality protections are statutory, and therefore may be modified by the Legislature.

  4. In re Welfare of M.L.M

    781 N.W.2d 381 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 6 times

    But we have addressed a due-process challenge to an earlier version of the statute involving the distinction between DNA collection from juveniles and DNA collection from adults. In re Welfare of Z.P.B., 474 N.W.2d 651, 654 (Minn.App. 1991) (holding that DNA collection from a juvenile under Minn. Stat. § 609.3461 (1990), which was renumbered as Minn. Stat. § 609.117, did not violate appellant's constitutional right to due process). The analysis applied there is instructive.