Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T19:24:19.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Retention of Offender DNA Samples Necessary to Ensure and Monitor Quality of Forensic DNA Efforts: Appropriate Safeguards Exist to Protect the DNA Samples from Misuse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2021

M. Dawn Herkenham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The topic of offender DNA databases and the retention of offender's DNA samples are issues that continue to generate debate between privacy advocates and forensic DNA scientists. Considered previously by both the Federal DNA Advisory Board and the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence, recommendations were made that the existing statutory frameworks were sufficient to protect the confidentiality and use of the DNA samples solely for forensic identification purposes and that the issue be revisited. Now, approximately five years since these debates, privacy advocates and forensic scientists retain divergent views on this issue. This brief essay is not intended to fuel the debate, but rather, to describe the protections and safeguards currently in place for the protection of the offender DNA samples.

Surrounding the discussion of the sample retention issue are the underlying principles for the establishment of the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) Program and the National DNA Index System (NDIS).

Type
Symposium
Information
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , Summer 2006 , pp. 380 - 384
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence, Transcripts of Meetings Held on July 26, 1999, September 26–27, 1999 and January 17, 2000 at <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/topics/forensics/dna/commission/meetdate.htm> (last visited February 20, 2006).+(last+visited+February+20,+2006).>Google Scholar
American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, DNA Fingerprinting and Civil Liberties Project – Report of Workshop 1, at <http://www.aslme.com/dna_04/work1/report.php> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Legislative Guidelines for DNA Databases, November 1991 [hereinafter Guidelines]; see also Federal Bureau of Investigation, CODIS Brochure, at <http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/codis/brochure.pdf> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
Guidelines, supra note 3.Google Scholar
Guidelines, supra note 3.Google Scholar
Brown, B., DNA Databases Using CODIS Software, presentation at 1st International DNA User's Conference, Lyons, France, November 24–26, 1999 at <http://www.interpol.int/public/Forensic/DNA/conference/DNADb02.asp> (last visited February 7, 2005). (last visited February 7, 2005).' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Brown,+B.,+DNA+Databases+Using+CODIS+Software,+presentation+at+1st+International+DNA+User's+Conference,+Lyons,+France,+November+24–26,+1999+at++(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
Ala. Code §36-18-25 (1994); N. M. Stat. Ann. §§29-16-3, 29-16-6 (1997); Tenn. Code Ann. §40-35-321 (1998); Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.2 (1990); Wis. Stat. §165.76 (1999); and Wyo. Stat. §7-19-403 (1997).Google Scholar
Callaghan, T., Update on CODIS, presentation at the 11th National CODIS Conference, Arlington, Virginia, November 7, 2005; Personal communication with Thomas Callaghan (November 28, 2005).Google Scholar
Ala. Code §36-18-25; Alaska Stat. §44.41.035; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §13–610; Ark. Code Ann. §12-12-1109; Cal. Penal Code §296.1; Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. §16-11-102.3; Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54–102g; Del. Code. Ann. tit. 29 §4713; Fla. Stat. Ann. §943.325; Ga. Code Ann. §24-4-60; Hawaii, H.B. 1733 (eff. July 1, 2005); 730 Ill. Stat. Ann. 5/5-4-3; Ind. Code. Ann. §10-13-6-10; Iowa H.F. 619 §81.2 (eff. June 14, 2005); Kan. Stat. Ann. §21–2511; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §15–609; Md. Code Ann., Public Safety §2–504; Mass. Ann. Laws Ch. 22E §3; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §712A.18k; Minn. Stat. Ann. §609.117; Miss. Code Ann. §47-5-183; Mo. Rev. Stat. §650.055; Mont. Code. Ann. §44-6-103; N.J. Stat. Ann. §53:1–20.20; N.M. Stat. Ann. §§29-16-3, 29-16-6; N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-266.4; N.D. Cent. Code §31-13-03; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§2152.74, 2901.07; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 57 §584; Or. Rev. Stat. §137.076, 44 Pa. Cons. Stat. §2316; R.I. Gen. Laws 12–1.5–7; S.C. Code Ann. §23-3-620; S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §§23–5A-1, 23–5A-5; Tenn. Code Ann. §40-35-321; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §§411.1471–148; Utah Code Ann. 53-10-403; 20 Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 §1933; Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.2; Wash. Rev. Code §43.43.754; W. Va. Code §15–2B-6(g); Wis. Stat. Ann. §165.76; Wyo. Stat. §7-19-403; 10 U.S.C. §1565; and 42 U.S.C. §14135a. Only two of these states provide for the destruction of the offender DNA sample “not necessary to conduct a present or future identity test” and “after analysis has been completed and the applicable court proceedings have concluded” respectively; both states report that no offender samples have been destroyed. W. Va. Code §15–2B-6(h); Wis. Stat. Ann. §165.77(3); Personal Communication with Lt. Brent Myers (November 30, 2005); Personal communication with Dirk Janssen (November 28, 2005).Google Scholar
Callaghan, T., CODIS Laboratory Survey 2005, presentation at the 11th National CODIS Conference, Arlington, Virginia, November 9, 2005.Google Scholar
National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence, “The Future of Forensic DNA Testing: Predictions of the Research and Development Working Group” [hereinafter “Predictions”] (November 2000): at 36, available at <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183697.htm> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
Id.Google Scholar
Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods Y-STR, Report on the Current Activities of the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods Y-STR Committee, Forensic Science Communications 6, no. 3 (2004), at <http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/july2004/standards/2004_03_standards03.htm> (last visited February 7, 2005); “Predictions,” supra note 11 at pp. 3, 30 and 43.+(last+visited+February+7,+2005);+“Predictions,”+supra+note+11+at+pp.+3,+30+and+43.>Google Scholar
National Research Council, “The Evaluation of Forensic DNA Evidence,” National Academy Press, 1996, at 37, 81 and 87.Google Scholar
Forensic Science Communications, DNA Advisory Board, Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories (July 1998) and Quality Assurance Standards for Convicted Offender DNA Testing Laboratories (April 1999) 2, no. 3 (2000) [hereinafter Quality Assurance], at <http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/july2000/index.htm> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
National Research Council, supra note 14, at 25.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§14132 (1994).Google Scholar
61 Fed. Reg. 139, 37495 (1996).Google Scholar
Adams, D. E., “The FBI's DNA Program,” Testimony before the House Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations, June 12, 2001, at <http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress01/dwight061201.htm> (last visited February 20, 2006); Predictions, supra note 11, at 35. (last visited February 20, 2006); Predictions, supra note 11, at 35.' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Adams,+D.+E.,+“The+FBI's+DNA+Program,”+Testimony+before+the+House+Committee+on+Government+Reform,+Subcommittee+on+Government+Efficiency,+Financial+Management+and+Intergovernmental+Relations,+June+12,+2001,+at++(last+visited+February+20,+2006);+Predictions,+supra+note+11,+at+35.>Google Scholar
61 Fed. Reg. 139, 37495 (1996).Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§14132(b)(3) (1994).Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§§14133(c), 14135e(c) (2004).Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§14132(c) (1994).Google Scholar
National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, “Fiscal Year 2005 Convicted Offender DNA Backlog Reduction Program (In-House Analysis)” May 27, 2005, at 9, at <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/funding/expired/fund2005exp.htm> (last visited February 20, 2006).+(last+visited+February+20,+2006).>Google Scholar
Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice, Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) Grant Reports, available at <http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/grants/_codis.htm> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
Federal Bureau of Investigation, “CODIS,” NDIS Statistics at <http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/codis/clickmap.htm> (last visited February 7, 2005).+(last+visited+February+7,+2005).>Google Scholar
Ala. Code §36-18-27; Alaska Stat. §44.41.035(2); Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §13–610(I); Ark. Code Ann. §12-12-1112(b); Cal. Penal Code §§299.5, 299.6; Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§16-11-102.3(6), 24-72-305(1.5); Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54–102j; Del. Code. Ann. tit. 29 §4713(f-g); Fla. Stat. Ann. §943.325(7); Ga. Code Ann. §24-4-63; Hawaii H.B. 1733 §82 (eff. July 1, 2005); Id. Code 19§§5514, 5515; 730 Ill. Stat. Ann. 5/5-4-3(f); Ind. Code. Ann. §10-13-6-15, 19; Iowa H.F. 619 §81.8 (eff. June 14, 2005); Kan. Stat. Ann. §21–2511; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §17.175; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §15–612; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 25, §1577; Md. Code Ann., Public Safety §2–508; Mass. Ann. Laws Ch. 22E §10; Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §28.176; Minn. Stat. Ann. §299C.155; Mo. Rev. Stat. §650.055; Mont. Code. Ann. §44-6-106; Neb. Rev. Stat. §29–4108; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §651-C:3; N.J. Stat. Ann. §53:1–20.24; N.M. Stat. Ann. §29-16-8; N.Y. Executive Law §995-c; N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-266.8; N.D. Cent. Code §31-13-05; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §109.573; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 74 §150.27a(D); Or. Rev. Stat. §181.085; 44 Pa. Cons. Stat. §2319; R.I. Gen. Laws 12–1.5–11; S.C. Code Ann. §23-3-650; S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §23–5A-25; Tenn. Code Ann. §38-6-113; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §411.147; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 §1937; Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.5; W. Va. Code §15–2B-10; Wis. Stat. Ann. §165.77; and Wyo. Stat. §7-19-404.Google Scholar
Ala. Code §36-18-28; Alaska Stat. §11.56.762; Ark. Code Ann. §12-12-1115; Cal. Penal Code §299.5; Colo. Rev. Stat. §24-72-309; Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54–102k; Del. Code. Ann. tit. 29 §4713(l); Ga. Code Ann. §24-4-64; Hawaii H.B. 1733 §113 (eff. July 1, 2005); Id. Code §19–5514; 730 Ill. Stat. Ann. 5/5-4-3(f-5); Ind. Code. Ann. §10-13-6-22; Iowa H.F. 619 §81.6 (eff. June 14, 2005); Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §17.175; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §15–618; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 25, §1578; Md. Code Ann., Public Safety §2–512; Mass. Ann. Laws Ch. 22E §§12, 13; Mo. Rev. Stat. §650.055; Neb. Rev. Stat. §§29–4110, 4111; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §651-C:4; N.J. Stat. Ann. §53:1–20.26; N.M. Stat. Ann. §29-16-12; N.Y. Executive Law §995-f; N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-266.11; N.D. Cent. Code §31-13-09; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§109.99, 109.573; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 74 §150.27a(D); 44 Pa. Cons. Stat. §2332; R.I. Gen. Laws 12–1.5–15; S.C. Code Ann. §23-3-650; S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §23–5A-26; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §411.153; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 §1941;Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.6; W. Va. Code §15–2B-12; Wis. Stat. Ann. §165.77(5); and Wyo. Stat. §7-19-404.Google Scholar
Ala. Code §36-18-28; Cal. Penal Code §298.2; Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54–102k; Del. Code. Ann. tit. 29 §4713(d); Ga. Code Ann. §24-4-64; Hawaii H.B. 1733 §112 (eff. July 1, 2005); Ind. Code. Ann. §10-13-6-21; Iowa H.F. 619 §81.6; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §17.170; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §15–618; Mass. Ann. Laws Ch. 22E §14; Neb. Rev. Stat. §29–4110; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §651-C:4; N.M. Stat. Ann. §29-16-12; N.Y. Executive Law §995-f; N.D. Cent. Code §31-13-04; R.I. Gen. Laws 12–1.5–15; S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §23–5A-26; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 §1945;Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.6; W. Va. Code §15–2B-13; and Wyo. Stat. §7-19-404.Google Scholar
Alaska Stat. §44.41.035(f); Ark. Code Ann. §12-12-1114; Cal. Penal Code §299.5(a); Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. §54–102i(b); Del. Code. Ann. tit. 29 §4713(g); Fla. Stat. Ann. §943.325(7); Ga. Code Ann. §24-4-62; Hawaii H.B. 1733 §81 (eff. July 1, 2005); Id. Code §19–5514; 730 Ill. Stat. Ann. 5/5-4-3(f); Iowa H.F. 619 §81.8 (eff. June 14, 2005); Kan. Stat. Ann. §21–2511; La. Rev. Stat. Ann. §15–616; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 25, §1577; Md. Code Ann., Public Safety §2–502; Mass. Ann. Laws Ch. 22E §9; Minn. Stat. Ann. §299C.155; Mo. Rev. Stat. §650.055; Mont. Code. Ann. §44-6-108; N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §651-C:3; N.J. Stat. Ann. §53:1–20.27; N.M. Stat. Ann. §29-16-8; N.Y. Executive Law §995-d; N.C. Gen. Stat. §15A-266.12; N.D. Cent. Code §31-13-06; Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §109.573; Okla. Stat. Ann. tit. 74 §150.27a; 44 Pa. Cons. Stat. §2334; R.I. Gen. Laws 12–1.5–16; S.C. Code Ann. §§23-3-640, 650; S.D. Codified Laws Ann. §§23–5A-22, 23; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. §411.153; Utah Code Ann. §53-10-406; Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 20 §1941;Va. Code Ann. §19.2–310.4; and W. Va. Code §15–2B-12.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§14132; Quality Assurance, supra note 15.Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§14132 (b)(2)(B) (2004).Google Scholar
42 U.S.C.§§14131, 14132; H.R. REP. NO. 45, 103rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1993).Google Scholar