United States
The US federal DNA database (CODIS) was established in 1998. It is the largest in the world.
The 2008 Interpol survey reported that 245,171 crime scene DNA profiles and 6,454,770 individuals' profiles, plus 519 missing persons' DNA profiles and 2,283 unknown/deceased DNA profiles were held in the US at the time of the survey. Since then the size of the database has doubled. According to FBI statistics, the National DNA Index (NDIS) contained over 10,692,400 offender profiles, 1,711,100 arrestee profiles and 527,400 forensic profiles as of November 2013.
The federal database includes DNA profiles submitted under laws which vary state by state. The Justice for All Act, 2004, expanded the national database by allowing the retention of DNA profiles from anyone charged with a felony offence. The Violence Against Women Act, 2005, allows DNA profiles to be uploaded on arrest, rather than on charge.
By end 2013, 28 US states had changed their laws to allow collection of DNA prior to conviction for a range of offences (Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Wisconsin). Of these 28 states, 10 require collection and/or analysis to occur only after changing, arraignment, indictment, or judicial determination of probable cause.
In March 2013, the Supreme Court made a 5-4 decision upholding Maryland's DNA testing law (which collects DNA on charge for some felonies and requires automatic expungement of innocent people's DNA profiles). However, laws in other states (which are broader in some cases, such as California, which collects on arrest for all felonies and has no automatic expungement process) are still subject to ongoing legal challenges. In most states, DNA profiles taken from arrested persons are not automatically removed if the person is innocent, although the individual can request removal. Automatic expungement processes exist in 7 of the 28 states which collect DNA prior to conviction.
Resources
- External links
- United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Haskell v. Harris (20th March 2014) Allows California's arrestee DNA testing law to continue but also grants leave to seek to narrow its application.
- US Department of Justice Office of Inspector General: Combined DNA Index System External Reports
- Press Release: U.S. Departments of Justice and Commerce Name Experts to First-ever National Commission on Forensic Science (10th January 2014)
- National Institute of Justice: Making Sense of DNA Backlogs, 2012 - Myths vs. Reality (December 2013)
- The Urban Institute: Collecting DNA at Arrest: Policies, Practices, and Implications (3rd June 2013)
- Forensic DNA Consulting Blog
- FBI: Combined DNA Index System (CODIS)
- FBI: CODIS - Expungement Policy
- FBI: Legislation Affecting the Federal DNA Database Unit
- GAO: DOJ Could Improve Decision - Making Documentation and Better Assess Results of DNA Backlog Reduction Program Funds (July 2013)
- ACLU: Supreme Court Ruling a Blow to Genetic Privacy (3rd June 2013)
- US Supreme Court: Maryland v. King (3rd June 2013)
- Mandara (2013) Compulsory collection and retention of DNA upon arrest: Fourth Amendment Implications (1st May 2013)
- US Supreme Court brief by Council for Responsible Genetics (February 2013)
- Congressional Research Service: DNA Testing in Criminal Justice: Background, Current Law, Grants, and Issues (6th December 2012)
- Armed Forces Repository of Specimen Samples for the Identification of Remains (AFRSSIR)
- Hares DR (2012): Overview of the FBI's CODIS Program
- Kreikemeier MA (2012) Touch DNA: A National Survey of Submission Policies and Laboratory Procedures
- Electronic Frontier Foundation: DHS Considers Collecting DNA From Kids; DEA and US Marshals Already Do (14th May 2012)
- DNA Resource: United States
State by state laws, on the DNAResource website, run by Gordon Thomas Honeywell Governmental Affairs and sponsored by DNA testing company Life Technologies. - National Institute of Justice: Making Sense of DNA Backlogs, 2010 — Myths vs. Reality (February 2011)
- National Institute of Justice: DNA Backlog Reduction Program
- JASON: The USD100 genome: implications for the DoD (December 2010)
- US Department of Justice: Combined DNA Index System Operational and Laboratory Vulnerabilities (May 2006)
- Violence against Women Act 2005
- Justice for All Act 2004
- DNA Identification Act 1994
- Press articles
- Capital Gazette: Appellate court upholds conviction in burglary DNA case (4th August 2014)
- Pilot Online: High bar for reopening an old case (4th August 2014)
- The Salt Lake Tribune: New short-cut analysis could cut Utah’s rape kit backlog (4th August 2014)
- Times Record: Study On Expansion Of Oklahoma DNA Database Set (4th August 2014)
- Public Radio Tulsa: Study on Expansion of Oklahoma DNA Database is Set (4th August 2014)
- Study on Expansion of Oklahoma DNA Database is Set (4th August 2014)
- Gnomes: Dallas man exonerated by DNA in 24-year-old rape case (3rd August 2014)
- New York Times: No Longer Ignored, Evidence Solves Rape Cases Years Later (2nd August 2014)
- Lincoln Star Journal: Statewide DNA database helps Lincoln police make robbery arrest (1st August 2014)
- Baltimore Sun: Appeals court upholds retention of volunteered DNA (30th July 2014)
- The Star Democrat: Driving down crime in the age of DNA (27th July 2014)
- Journal Gazette: State storing newborns’ blood minus parents’ OK (13th July 2014)
- Denver Post: CBI finds 24 DNA matches from 150 untested rape kits (17th July 2014)
- Editorial: DNA and Privacy in Vermont (17th July 2014)
- Houma Today: DNA evidence helps connect inmates to other crimes (16th July 2014)
- KLAS-TV: New law used to find criminals raises concerns about rights (11th July 2014)
- Fox19: Rape kit testing becoming political debate (10th July 2014)
- The Columbus Dispatch: Justice is catching up (9th July 2014)
- Heartland: Rhode Island May Use DNA to Track Students (9th July 2014)
- WCAX: Vermont court rules no DNA collection until conviction (12th July 2014)
- Washington Post: Ohio leads the way on breaking through the rape kit backlog (6th July 2014)
- The Times News: Match Game(5th July 2014)
- CBS: CONNECTS AGAINST CRIME: DNA Database Expansion (3rd July 2014)
- Inside Nevada Politics: Brianna's Law, or DNA testing for felony arrests, begins in Nevada (1st July 2014)
- New York Times: Florida Court Overturns Death Sentence for 1985 Killing (26th June 2014)
- Fox 8: Greensboro police eye DNA evidence for burglaries, car break-ins (23rd June 2014)
- BayNet.com Maryland's DNA database records 3,500th hit (20th June 2014)
- NJ.com: NJ should collect DNA swabs just like fingerprints: Editorial (20th June 2014)
- Politiker NJ: SACCO-SARLO BILL TO IMPROVE PUBLIC SAFETY BY EXPANDING DNA DATABASE APPROVED BY LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE (19th June 2014)
- San Diego Jewish World: DA’s DNA program receives award (13th June 2014)
- Campbell Patch: Defense Seeks To Chip Away at Prosecution's DNA Evidence in Ex-Supe Shirakawa Case (11th June 2014)
- NJ.com: Reacting to wrongly imprisoned man: Fix NJ's DNA testing law (9th June 2014)
- Providence Journal: Over-sampling DNA (1st June 2014)
- CBS5AZ: New DNA testing machine to help 'rapidly' catch suspects (14th May 2014)
- PilotOnline: Expanding DNA database used to solve lesser crimes (9th May 2014)
- Sheboygan Press: Wisconsin turns to controversial familial DNA testing to solve old murders, rapes(8th May 2014)
- Cape Cod Times: DNA deal reached in Christa Worthington murder case (6th May 2014)
- NextGov: It's Hard to Say If This Baltimore Crime Lab Whittled Down Its DNA Sample Backlog (5th May 2014)
- Fox 5 San Diego: DNA database boosting convictions and jail time for repeat offenders (30th April 2014)
- Daily Mail: Serial rapists walk free in Detroit as up to 9,000 rape kits remain untested 5 YEARS after being discovered abandoned in a police warehouse (21st April 2014)
- USA Today: Detroit rape kit testing backlog lingers (21st April 2014)
- Detroit Free Press: As Detroit rape kits sit untested, justice for victims is denied (21st April 2014)
- New York Post: DNA swab kits to help MTA bus drivers bust spitters (20th April 2014)
- Rape kit testing in Louisiana (7th April 2014)
- Pacific Standard: Do You Own Your Identity Online? (4th April 2014)
- Newark Patch: Congressman Asks FBI to Reduce Backlog of Untested Rape Kits (3rd April 2014)
- The Midweek Wire: The science of safety (2nd April 2014)
- Al.com: DNA testing could become part of security clearance procedure for federal workers (1st April 2013)
- KTVB: New law limits DNA collection in Idaho (1st April 2014)
- Navy Times: Hagel orders overhaul of remains recovery mission (31st March 2014)
- Genomics Law Report: Judicial and Legislative Reactions in California to Maryland v. King, 133 S. Ct. 158 (2013) (31st March 2013)
- East Bay Express: Mike Honda Asks House Committee to Remove Barriers for Reducing Rape Kit Backlog (26th March 2014)
- WBNS-10TV: 3,000 DNA Test Results To Be Reviewed At Columbus Crime Lab (26th March 2014)
- Stanford Law School Blog: Breaking News - Ninth Circuit En Banc Opinion “Affirms” Haskell v. Harris (21st March 2014)
- Wall Street Journal: California DNA Collection Law Upheld by Court (21st March 2014)
- Court keeps DNA law, but suit still alive (20th March 2014)
- The Alpenhorn News: San Bernardino County’s DNA backlog (18th March 2014)
- Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: Assembly should join Senate to adjust DNA collection law (13th March 2014)
- Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel: Senate quickly makes unexpected changes to DNA-collection law (11th March 2014)
- CBS Pittsburgh: Firm To Help Police Analyze DNA Found In East Liberty Double Murder (11th March 2014)
- Sioux City Journal: Law enforcement sees new Iowa DNA law as crime-fighting tool (11th March 2014)
- LSJ: Cases illustrate possible pitfalls of untested kits (10th March 2014)
- Mother Board: Genetic Profiling and Predictive Policing Are Taking Us to the Pre-Crime Future (6th March 2014)
- AP: Oklahoma House rejects bill to expand DNA database (5th March 2014)
- Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Allegheny County crime lab vying to use more advanced DNA database (28th February 2014)
- Associated Press: Committee Narrows "Katie's Law" DNA Testing Bill (19th February 2014)
- SFGate: Rape kit testing backlog undermines justice for victims (17th February 2014)
- The Parthenon: MU Forensic Science Center collects DNA of criminals across the country (17th February 2014)
- MotherBoard: Why Criminal DNA Records Should Be Public (3rd February 2014)
- Omaha.com: Iowa law means more must give DNA samples (3rd February 2014)
- USA Today: Pentagon, scientists closing in on rapid DNA technology (27th January 2014)
- The Florida Times-Union: Federal grant could fund DNA database that could solve cold cases, free wrongly convicted (27th January 2014)
- Sioux City Journal: Genes and crime scenes (25th January 2014)
- UPI: 166 errors found in national DNA database (25th January 2014)
- New York Times: F.B.I. Audit of Database That Indexes DNA Finds Errors in Profiles (24th January 2014)
- Problem with DNA robot led to Denver police DNA mix-up (10th January 2014
- DNA evidence in Grim Sleeper case was taken legally, judge rules (7th January 2014)
- DNA Registry Would Help Solve Crimes in Pennsylviania, Police, Prosecutors Say (6th January 2014)
- The Verge: Is DNA analysis stuck in the past? (2nd January 2014)
- The Salt Lake Tribune: Utah Police Agencies Have Stockpiles of Unprocessed Rape Kits (1st January 2014)
- A look at why it took 6 years for ‘Jane Doe 2’ to be identified (28th December 2013)
- SurfKY.com: Department of Corrections Issues Comprehensive Action Plan to Improve Felon DNA Collection (11th December 2013)
- Winston-Salem Journal: Computers work overtime in crime lab (26th December 2013)
- Miami OK.com: Should Oklahoma Collect DNA from Arrestees? (20th December 2013)
- In the dark no longer: Butte County streamlines DNA-testing process in cases of sexual violence (5th December 2013)
- The Ledger: Forensic DNA Use Has Exploded as Agencies Use It Even in Everyday Crimes (2nd December 2013)
- Homeland Security News Wire: Pentagon maintains a DNA database with 80,000 DNA profiles (15th December 2013)
- San Jose Mercury News: California's DNA Collection Law in Key Legal Test (9th December 2013)
- U-T San Diego: DNA sample concerns spur new police system (3rd December 2013)
- Washington Examiner: New questions raised about mandatory DNA swabbing by police (20th November 2013)
- Augusta Chronicle: Senator says bill will boost DNA hits (11th November 2013)
- Daily Gazette: Public debates the DNA issue - and so do I (19th October 2013)
- Iowa Public Radio: DA's Office Asks For DNA In Exchange For Dropped Charges (9th October 2013)
- Democratic Underground: More DNA Samples, More Debate (23rd September 2013)
- New York Times: Double Take (16th September 2013)
- Times Union: DNA test put on trial (16th September 2013)
- Genomics Law Report: Ninth Circuit Orders Rehearing of Haskell v. Harris (19th August 2013)
- Texas Tribune: Some Worry Over a Law to Increase DNA Testing (17th August 2013)
- Slate: Why DNA Testing Failed to Link the In Cold Blood Killers to a Gruesome Murder in Florida (14th August 2013)
- e! Science News: Forensic familial search methods carry risk of certain false matches (14th August 2013) There is a video abstract and general public explanation video available for this research
- Fierce Government: Justice Department lacks information on DNA backlog, report says (12th August 2013)
- ForensicPsychologistBlogspot: New analyses undermine perception of DNA infallibility (2nd August 2013)
- RT: Clerk who helped inmate exonerate himself with DNA evidence fired (1st August 2013)
- New York Times: High-Tech, High-Risk Forensics (24th July 2013)
- Boston Globe: Family of confessed Boston Strangler angry over DNA sample (11th July 2013)
- CBS: SF Bay Area: South Bay Paramedics Likely Brought Innocent Man's DNA To Murder Scene (28th June 2013)
- SFGate: How innocent man's DNA was found at killing scene (26th June 2013)
- New York Times: Police Agencies Are Assembling Records of DNA (12th June 2013)
- Chemical and Engineering News: DNA Ruling Raises Science Concerns (10th June 2013)
- Bloomberg: Routine DNA Testing After Arrest Upheld by Top U.S. Court (3rd June 2013)
- Bloomberg: Court's DNA Ruling Brings U.S. a Step Closer to 'Gattaca' (3rd June 2013)
- New York Daily News: Pioneer in DNA testing quits Medical Examiner's Office over lab violations (16th May 2013)
- Scientific American: The Government wants your DNA (March 2013)
- Detroit News: Justices mixed on DNA database (27th February 2013)
- Genetic Engineering News: DNA Collection v. DNA Privacy (27th February 2013)
- WFPL News: Supreme Court Considers If Warrantless DNA Swab Violates Constitution (26th February 2013)
- Fierce Government: Justice proposes forensic science governing body (25th February 2013)
- McAlester News: Why collecting DNA from people who are arrested won't solve more crimes (16th February 2013)
- New York Times: Mishandling of DNA Evidence Is Found in Over 50 Cases at Crime Lab (31st January 2013)
- New York Times: New York Examines Over 800 Rape Cases for Possible Mishandling of Evidence (10th January 2013)
- Right Side News: Rapid DNA: Coming Soon to a Police Department or Immigration Office Near You (7th January 2013)
- Baltimore Sun: Supreme Court will review Md. DNA law (9th November 2012)
- Wired: Supreme Court Weighing Genetic Privacy (8th November 2012)
- The NorthWestern: Expanded DNA collection draws fire (22nd October 2012)
- PostCresent.com (Wisconsin): Expanded DNA collection draws fire (21st October 2012)
- Government Technology: Will Private DNA Services Replace State Crime Labs? (11th October 2012)
- Reuters: Citing privacy concerns, U.S. panel urges end to secret DNA testing (11th October 2012)
- VV Daily Press: No DNA samples without a conviction (2nd October 2012)
- Huffington Post: Why Are the Freemasons Collecting Our Children's DNA? (26th September 2012)
- PC Advisor: FBI eager to embrace mobile 'Rapid DNA' testing (18th September 2012)
- New York Times: DNA Match Tying Protest to 2004 Killing Is Doubted (11th July 2012)
- RT: Kids' DNA collection? Possible with Homeland Security (20th May 2012)
- Baltimore Sun: Md. high court strikes down DNA collection at arrest (24th April 2012)
- BBC: FBI's DNA database upgrade plans come under fire (17th October 2011)
- Officer.com: DNA Mix Up Leads to Rape Case Review in Florida (27th September 2011)
- The Pottsdown Mercury: Convicted murderer wins court battle for DNA tests of evidence (20th September 2011)
- Boston Globe: Court says state can't hold DNA (26th August 2011)
- San Francisco Chronicle: DNA: Law requiring arrestees' samples struck down (5th August 2011)
- Las Vegas Sun: Man wrongly convicted after a DNA mix-up awarded USD1.5 million (25th July 2011)
- Huffington Post: Illinois Bill Could Allow State To Collect DNA From Those Presumed Innocent, Marking Nationwide Shift (26th May 2011)
- Wall Street Journal: Genes draw likenesses of suspects (27th March 2009)
- Washington Post: Incriminating proof (15th January 2009)
- FAS Project on Government Secrecy: Joint Intelligence DNA Database Described (18th November 2008)
- Financial Times: Fears over covert DNA database (17th November 2008)
- Washington Post: US to expand collection of crime suspects’ DNA (17th April 2008)
Detailed analysis
The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) Combined DNA Index System program (CODIS) enables federal, state and local laboratories to store and compare DNA profiles electronically and thereby link serial crimes to each other and identify suspects by matching DNA from crime scenes to convicted offenders or arrestees (where state legislation allows this). All 50 states and the FBI now collect DNA samples, retain the profiles generated from those samples in the databases, and compare the database entries against DNA profiles of biological evidence. There are obviously differences amongst the states as to collection criteria, sample retention and removal of entries from the databases. It is impossible to give a complete overview of the position in each state in this paper and the aim is merely to briefly summarise the contents of the main pieces of legislation and to highlight trends amongst states.
Legislation:
- The DNA Identification Act, 1994, allows for DNA identification records to be kept of: (a) Persons convicted of crimes, this will vary from State to State in accordance with the DNA database laws of each State; (b) DNA samples recovered from crime scenes; (c) DNA samples recovered from unidentified human remains; and (d) DNA samples voluntarily contributed from relatives of missing persons. (Refer to See 42 U.S.C.S. §14132(a).).
- The Justice for All Act, 2004, allows for the retention in the National DNA Index System (NDIS) of DNA profiles from persons who have been charged in an indictment, even if the charges are eventually dropped or not pursued. The Act affects the qualifying offences for entry onto the National DNA database. Previously these were limited to sexual offences and other serious violent crimes, but have been amended to include "any felony". In terms of the Act, DNA profiles may not be uploaded to the NDIS if: (a) The arrestee has not been charged; or (b) DNA samples have been submitted voluntarily for the purposes of elimination from a crime sample.
- The Violence Against Women Act, 2005, allows for the uploading of an arrestee's DNA profile into the NDIS at the same time that their fingerprints are taken and uploaded onto the national fingerprint database. Previously DNA could not be uploaded until the arrestee was charged or indicted. The Act removes the burden from the State to remove an arrestee sample from the NDIS if the arrestee was later acquitted or if the charges were dismissed. The burden shifts onto the arrestee, who will be required to file a certified copy of a final court order establishing that all indexable charges have been dismissed, resulted in acquittal or that no charges were filed. The Act allows the Federal Government to take and retain DNA samples from Federal arrestees and from non-U.S. citizens or permanent residents who are detained under Federal authority. The Act gives the Attorney General the authority to issue regulations requiring the collection of such DNA profiles including requiring other Federal agencies to collect these: e.g. immigration agencies.
Who must provide a sample:<ref name="ftn1"> See http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cj/dnadatabanks.htm “State Laws on DNA Data Banks Qualifying Offenses, Others Who must provide sample” (July 2008).
</ref>
- Twelve states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia – now have laws authorizing arrestee sampling.
- All 50 states require that convicted sex offenders provide a DNA sample, and states are increasingly expanding these policies to include all felons or many serious felony offenders. To date (July 2008), 46 states require that all convicted felons provide a DNA sample to the state’s database.
- Eleven states to date specify certain misdemeanors among those who must provide a sample.
- There are 28 states that include DNA from delinquent juveniles in the database, of these there are 12 states that restrict the scope of qualifying offences with regard to juveniles. For example, California provides that qualifying offences are the same for adult convicts and juvenile delinquents, but juvenile arrestees, unlike adults, are excluded from the database.
Retention of information and samples:<ref name="ftn2"> See Survey of State DNA Database Statutes (2004) available at www.aslme.org/dna_04/grid/guide.pdf.
</ref>
- Thirty-eight states contain statutes that detail expungement criteria and procedure. DNA samples and records are expunged upon a change in the disposition of the case in the convict’s favor, provided that the offender has not been convicted of a separate qualifying offence. The state statutes differ, however, in the extent to which the disposition of the case must change before expungement proceedings begin. Some states only require that the defendant’s conviction be reversed, whereas others require that the conviction be reversed and the case dismissed. Of the 38 statutes that detail the expungement procedure, 33 require the offender to initiate the process. Of these 33 it is only Texas that contains a statutory provision requiring the defendant to be advised after his acquittal of his right to expungement.
- The criteria for retention vary from immediate removal, if a sample is not used, to retention of a sample for at least 35 years, to permanent retention for certain specified offences.
In general, the statutes authorize use of DNA and the database for law enforcement purposes, and for purposes of maintaining and improving the database. However, in certain states the creation of population statistical databases, tools which allow for the statistical analysis and interpretation of anonymous DNA profiles collected from convicted offenders, are established. DNA databases in the US typically authorize certain uses of offender’s genetic information and prohibit unauthorized uses and are therefore usually exempted from genetic privacy laws. The DNA statutes of the states also differ with regard to the criminal and civil liabilities provided therein for the misuse of the DNA database. Typically criminal penalties are imposed for: a) tampering with the DNA samples or records; b) improper entry of DNA samples and records into the database; c) improper access to and use of DNA samples and records; and d) improper disclosure of DNA samples and records. Only seven states provide for a private cause of action for individuals aggrieved by the misuse of the database and four states explicitly provide immunity from civil and / or criminal liability for misuse of the database.
<references/>