A California appellate court (First District, Division Two) has issued a ruling that invalidates collection of DNA samples from people who have been merely arrested. The decision pertains to Proposition 69, passed by California voters in November 2004, authorizing expansion of the circumstances under which law enforcement could collect DNA samples. Though the court's ruling affects cases in its Bay Area district, it does provide case law that defense attorneys can refer to when similar issues arise here in Sacramento.
Much of the court's analysis focuses on the vast amounts of information that can be obtained from DNA analysis. According to the court, DNA samples are different than fingerprints because fingerprints can only be used for identification. DNA samples, in contrast, reveal vast quantities of personal data, including heredity and disposition to disease. And the scope of this information will only expand as DNA analysis and research progresses in coming years.
Because of this, the court declared, people have a right to privacy that government can breach only under limited circumstances. And merely being arrested doesn't pass the test. Collection of DNA samples from arrestees constitutes an unreasonable search in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, a "warrantless and suspicion less" search not supported by previous rulings in state and federal courts.
The Attorney General's Office had argued in defense of the law that collection of DNA samples from arrestees is a valuable tool in fighting crime. The court, however, said that no matter how effective, the law is still an unconstitutional invasion of privacy.
It's important to note that this decision changes nothing about collection of DNA from people convicted of specific crimes, as delineated by various California laws. It only pertains to the collection of DNA from people who have been merely arrested.
