skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 228383 Find in a Library
Title: Debating DNA Collection
Journal: NIJ Journal  Issue:264  Dated:September 2009  Pages:9-13
Series: NIJ Journal
Author(s): Sarah B Berson
Date Published: September 2009
Page Count: 5
Document: HTML
Type: Legislation/Policy Description
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article examines State and Federal laws that authorize the collection of DNA samples from persons who are arrested but have not yet been convicted of a crime, as well as debates and court cases that have ensued from these laws.
Abstract: The Federal DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005 requires that, beginning January 1, 2009, any adult arrested for a Federal crime provide a DNA sample. The law also requires DNA collection from persons detained under the authority of the United States who are not U.S. citizens or are not lawfully in the country. Even before passage of this act, five States - California, Louisiana, Minnesota, Texas, and Virginia - had enacted laws that mandated collecting DNA from people arrested for various qualifying offenses. Although some States limit preconviction DNA collection to violent offenses or sex crimes, other States include all felonies; and some extend the requirement to misdemeanors. Variations among such State laws include the types of crimes for which samples are collected, applicability of the law to juveniles, and procedures for deleting DNA profiles. Some State laws have faced fourth amendment court challenges that focus on search and seizure issues. Courts have viewed collecting and analyzing DNA as a "search" in these challenges; however, the courts have not definitively settled the legal status of preconviction DNA sampling. Two States, Virginia and Minnesota have experienced challenges to their preconviction DNA collection statutes along this line of argument. The courts have come down on opposite sides of the issue, with Virginia's law held to be constitutional, and Minnesota's law held unconstitutional. Regarding the Federal law, in the first case of its kind a Federal judge in California ruled that it was constitutional to take a DNA sample at the time of arrest for a felony. 21 notes
Main Term(s): Police policies and procedures
Index Term(s): Arrest procedures; California; DNA fingerprinting; Federal courts; Federal legislation; Louisiana; Minnesota; Search and seizure; State laws; Texas; Virginia
Note: For other articles in this issue, see NCJ-228382 and NCJ-228384-87; for an overview of all articles, see NCJ-228381
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.