skip navigation

Justinfo Subscribe to Stay Informed

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


NCJRS Abstract


Subscribe to Stay Informed
Want to be in the know? JUSTINFO is a biweekly e-newsletter containing information about new publications, events, training, funding opportunities, and Web-based resources available from the NCJRS Federal sponsors. Sign up to get JUSTINFO in your inbox.

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
NCJ Number: NCJ 242813     Find in a Library
Title: Collecting DNA at Arrest: Policies, Practices, and Implications, Executive Summary
  Document URL: PDF 
Author(s): Julie E. Samuels ; Elizabeth H. Davies ; Dwight B. Pope
Corporate Author: The Urban Institute
United States of America
Date Published: 06/2013
Page Count: 9
  Annotation: This is the executive summary of a study that assessed the effects and implications of expanding DNA collection to include arrestees, with attention to the provisions of existing arrestee DNA laws, how the courts have interpreted these laws, and how they have been implemented by State laboratories and collecting agencies; it also addressed how this practice has affected the growth of DNA databases, the number of “hits” to forensic profiles, and the frequency with which DNA aids investigations.
Abstract: The study found that arrestee DNA laws vary considerably by State. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision about the constitutionality of Maryland’s arrestee DNA law (anticipated in June 2013) will determine whether attention can move from the threshold question of the practice’s constitutionality to the broader questions pertinent to whether such laws could be implemented more effectively and at less cost. Most DNA laws that include provisions for expungement of arrestee DNA in the event of acquittal or dismissal place the responsibility of expungement on arrestee initiative. The study’s analysis of State-provided data indicates that arrestee DNA laws have contributed to additional DNA profiles in CODIS and additional hits; however, the study could not estimate the number of hits for which arrestee DNA laws were solely responsible. The study also determined that the implementation of arrestee laws has imposed significant administrative and analytical burdens on many State laboratories and collecting agencies. The researchers advise that States that do not currently have arrestee DNA laws may wish to consider the potential benefits of expanded collection in terms of a real but limited number of additional hits, given the cost of collecting and analyzing arrestee DNA. Even if the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately upholds such laws, questions will remain about their cost-effectiveness. Data sources and data collection are described. 1 table
Main Term(s): Criminology
Index Term(s): Suspect identification ; State laws ; Arrest procedures ; DNA fingerprinting ; NIJ final report
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Grant Number: 2009-DN-BX-0004
Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Type: Report (Grant Sponsored) ; Legislation/Policy Analysis ; Report (Summary)
Country: United States of America
Language: English
Note: See NCJ-242812 for the Final Technical Report
  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 web site is provided.