Court rules that DNA samples can be collected from people who have been arrested but not convicted

[Jenna]

A closely divided 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has found that the collection of DNA samples from people arrested -- but not yet convicted -- of crimes is constitutional, in an opinion released today.

Read more: U.S. Appeals Court: OK to check DNA of those arrested

[121Traffic]

It's already in effect here. It's called Katie's Law, and it pertains to felony arrests only, including felony warrants. We've been doing it since last august. The statute says we can use reasonable force to collect it but our DA isn't backing that. Instead of force we just withhold bond since processing is not yet complete, just as if we havent gotten prints or a photo yet.

[MacLean]

Be interesting to see if it survives SCOTUS, in particular on warrant arrests.

[121Traffic]

Well with the warrants, we have to make a dilligent effort to check if DNA has already been taken. It is ideally listed on the criminal history. It should be noted that if the defendant is not convicted, a simple form ensures that his DNA is wiped from the system.

[luckyme]

I would be interested to see the courts weigh DNA versus fingerprinting for this type of situation. When an inmate is currently booked his fingerprints are taken. Is this any different? A different method, sure, but when measured against the 4th admen., is it different?

It does have the look of a "slippery slope" type situation to me though.

[MacLean]

Fingerprints are not invasive.

I'll wait along with the rest of us to hear.

My inclination would be "not constitutional."

[irishmick]

It should be noted that if the defendant is not convicted, a simple form ensures that his DNA is wiped from the system.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't trust the system and the gov't to actually destroy/wipe it from the system.

My inclination would be "not constitutional."

This. And the reason would be because are they searching/seizing for that crime? Or, since it's in the system, will they be searching it against other crimes committed? If they're searching it against other crimes, I would think that's unreasonable.

[A3148]

In NC we have a list of crimes that when you are processed we take a DNA sample and send it to the state. If you are not convicted they are supposed to destroy the sample.

[Motorwaycop]

we've been taking DNA as a matter of course for any person brought into custody. Fingerprint. Photograph and DNA. pre charge.
Detainee is told that DNA and fingerprints can be used in a speculative search to see if they match any other crimes.
DNA is only taken once and then listed on a persons criminal record.
I have no problems personally with it and my DNA is also on the system for elimination purposes as are my fingerptints. Do I care if they are destroyed when I finish? No not really I don't plan on any criminal acts.
It has gone to the European courts and the time of storage has been reduced in certain cases but we still take the samples.

[MacLean]

we've been taking DNA as a matter of course for any person brought into custody. Fingerprint. Photograph and DNA. pre charge.
Detainee is told that DNA and fingerprints can be used in a speculative search to see if they match any other crimes.
DNA is only taken once and then listed on a persons criminal record.
I have no problems personally with it and my DNA is also on the system for elimination purposes as are my fingerptints. Do I care if they are destroyed when I finish? No not really I don't plan on any criminal acts.
It has gone to the European courts and the time of storage has been reduced in certain cases but we still take the samples.

Don't worry old chap, we are trying to become you just as fast as you are trying to become them.

Presently though, we still have our constitution. For a while.

[Motorwaycop]

Got to be honest I'm suprised we ever get any matched to crimes. Every time I've asked for deployed air bags and other things, I know for a fact have been in direct contact with someone, to be checked for DNA our very own Grissom and Willows have come up with the sweet sum of F.A.

[MacLean]

Our lab here in WA has a very high hit rate, but we have to have a warrant to get DNA in any instance from a person that is pre-conviction unless it is from evidence located legally.