Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 8:37 pm
Time: 8:37 pm
Results for dna typing (u.s.)
4 results foundAuthor: Barbour, Emily C. Title: DNA Databanking: Selected Fourth Amendment Issues and Analysis Summary: Over the past few decades, state and federal lawmakers have promoted the development of databases containing DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) profiles for individuals who are under the supervision of the criminal justice system due to their known or suspected involvement in a felony or other qualifying crime. Congress has demonstrated concern toward some aspects of DNA databanking by requiring expungement of a DNA profile in certain circumstances, prohibiting most non-forensic uses of DNA profiles and databases, and restricting familial searching. However, in general, Congress has taken a supportive attitude toward DNA databanking and has incentivized the development, expansion, and integration of DNA databases. As DNA database programs have widened in scope and grown in numbers, their consistency with the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures has increasingly been challenged. In the context of compulsory DNA collection, courts have widely upheld laws mandating the collection of DNA from persons who were convicted and are subject to the penal system’s custody or supervision. However, no judicial consensus has emerged regarding the constitutionality of mandating DNA collection from arrestees who have been criminally indicted. Instead, courts have split over the existence and scope of an arrestee’s reasonable expectation of privacy and the degree of privacy intrusion caused by DNA sampling. The limited number of court decisions in this area also suggests that there are conflicting opinions about the analogousness of DNA collection and fingerprinting. Courts have generally upheld the indefinite use and storage of a lawfully databanked DNA profile after its source’s conviction. However, not all courts agree that any post-conviction use of those profiles is constitutionally acceptable. In particular, observers are now raising questions about the Fourth Amendment consistency of using databases for non-forensic purposes and for familial searching — that is, using the DNA databases to locate potential relatives of an unidentified suspect. Currently, these concerns are largely confined to the scholarly literature — they have not come before a federal court — and are primarily centered on state database programs. Unlike some state DNA databases, the National DNA Index System (NDIS) and the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) can not be used for either non-forensic research or intentional familial searching. However, the increase in states that authorize familial searching suggests that it may not be long before the constitutionality of familial searching comes before a federal court. As these issues percolate up to the courts, new advances and revelations in the science of forensic analysis and databanking may have potentially significant legal implications. Several courts have suggested that new forensic techniques and scientific findings would require them to reevaluate their legal conclusions and analysis. In particular, research into the scope and nature of the information revealed by the “junk” DNA used in forensic analysis may alter how courts measure the intrusiveness of DNA profiling if it suggests that “junk” DNA reveals more sensitive information about its source than scientists previously thought. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2011. 23p. Source: Internet Resource: R41847: Accessed July 21, 2011 at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41847.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41847.pdf Shelf Number: 122139 Keywords: DNA FingerprintingDNA Typing (U.S.)Fourth AmendmentOffender Supervision |
Author: James, Nathan Title: DNA Testing in Criminal Justice: Background, Current Law, Grants and Issues Summary: Deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA, is the fundamental building block for an individual’s entire genetic makeup. DNA is a powerful tool for law enforcement investigations because each person’s DNA is different from that of every other individual (except for identical twins). DNA can be extracted from a number of sources, such as hair, bone, teeth, saliva, and blood. As early as the 1980s, states began enacting laws that required collecting DNA samples from offenders convicted of certain sexual and other violent crimes. The samples were then analyzed and their profiles entered into state databases. Meanwhile, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Laboratory convened a working group of federal, state, and local forensic scientists to establish guidelines for the use of forensic DNA analysis in laboratories. The group proposed guidelines that are the basis of current national quality assurance standards, and it urged the creation of a national DNA database. The criminal justice community began to utilize DNA analyses more often in criminal investigations and trials, and in 1994 Congress enacted legislation to authorize the creation of a national DNA database. Federal law (42 U.S.C §14132(a)) authorizes the FBI to operate and maintain a national DNA database where DNA profiles generated from samples collected from people under applicable legal authority and samples collected at crime scenes can be compared to generate leads in criminal investigations. Statutory provisions also authorize the collection of DNA samples from federal offenders and arrestees, District of Columbia offenders, and military offenders. State laws dictate which convicted offenders, and sometimes people arrested for crimes, will have profiles entered into state DNA databases, while federal law dictates the scope of the national database. Increasing awareness of the power of DNA to solve crimes has resulted in increased demand for DNA analysis, which has resulted in a backlog of casework. Some jurisdictions have started to use their DNA databases for familial searching, which involves using offender profiles to identify relatives who might be perpetrators of crimes. In addition to solving crimes, DNA analysis can help exonerate people incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. Congress has authorized several grant programs to provide assistance to state and local governments for forensic sciences. Many of the programs focus on providing state and local governments with funding to reduce the backlog of forensic and convicted offender DNA samples waiting to be processed and entered into the national database. Since FY2006, Congress has appropriated approximately $785 million for backlog reduction and laboratory capacity enhancement programs. However, other grant programs provide funding for related purposes, such as offsetting the cost of providing post-conviction DNA testing. In the 1990s and the early part of the last decade, most of the debate in Congress focused on the scope of DNA databases, reducing the backlog of DNA casework, and providing access to postconviction DNA testing. Most of the debate about the scope of DNA databases faded away with the enactment of the Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-162), which expanded federal collection statutes to include anyone arrested or detained under the authority of the United States. The act also expanded the scope of the national database to include DNA profiles of individuals arrested for state crimes. However, concerns about the backlog of DNA casework and access to post-conviction testing have persisted. In addition, new issues related to the use of DNA in criminal justice have emerged, including whether (1) DNA databases should be used to conduct familial searches, (2) sexual assault evidence collection kits (i.e., “rape kits”) should be standardized, and (3) there should be national accreditation standards for forensic laboratories. Details: Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 2011. 49p. Source: CRS R41800: Internet Resource: Accessed February 28, 2012 at http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41800.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41800.pdf Shelf Number: 124305 Keywords: Crime LaboratoriesDNA FingerprintingDNA Typing (U.S.)Forensic ScienceForensics |
Author: Anderson, Vincent J. Title: Decrease the Number of Contract Laboratory Cases Awaiting Data Review While Improving DNA Analysis Efficiency Summary: As of September 30, 2011, case turn-around time increased from 71 days to 108 days for delivery of the final report, due to the assigning of older cases in the backlog and a change in reporting dates. The samples per analyst per month increased 82 percent from a baseline of 15.9 to 29.0. Also, the backlog of requests for DNA analysis decreased approximately 52 percent from a baseline of 3,107 to 1,491. Although no funds from this grant were directly used to fund the validation of new analytical platforms, because of funds used from this grant for overtime to perform subcontractor reviews, LAPD personnel were able to conduct research into developing a method for spermatozoa identification and extraction using Laser Micro dissection. As of September 30, 2011, LAPD has reviewed 2,865 reports from outside vendors under the Efficiency Grant. Those reviews have led to 1,705 cases with at least one CODIS upload and 895 cases with at least one CODIS Hit Notification. Those cases were reviewed on grant-funded overtime in the amount of $238,061.64. This grant stemmed from the LAPD’s need to upload subcontractor DNA profiles into the CODIS database in a timely and efficient manner while still allowing time to develop and implement DNA analysis efficiency measures. This circumstance encouraged the LAPD to apply for the 2009 Forensic DNA Unit Efficiency Improvement grant (Efficiency Grant). Details: Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, 2011. 66p. Source: NCJ 236693: Internet Resource: Accessed March 10, 2012 at https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236693.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236693.pdf Shelf Number: 124427 Keywords: Crime LaboratoriesDNA FingerprintingDNA Typing (U.S.)Forensic ScienceForensicsSexual Assault |
Author: Roman, John Title: Post-Conviction DNA Testing and Wrongful Conviction Summary: This study analyzed the results of new DNA testing of old physical evidence from 634 sexual assault and homicide cases that took place in Virginia between 1973 and 1987 in the first study of the effects of DNA testing on wrongful conviction in a large and approximately random sample of serious crime convictions. The study found that in five percent of homicide and sexual assault cases DNA testing eliminated the convicted offender as the source of incriminating physical evidence. When sexual assault convictions were isolated, DNA testing eliminated between 8 and 15 percent of convicted offenders and supported exoneration. Past estimates generally put the rate of wrongful conviction at or less than three percent. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, Justice Policy Center, 2012. 69p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 2, 2012 at: http://www2.timesdispatch.com/mgmedia/file/796/urban-institute-report/ Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www2.timesdispatch.com/mgmedia/file/796/urban-institute-report/ Shelf Number: 125445 Keywords: DNA Typing (U.S.)HomicidesSex CrimesSexual AssaultWrongful Convictions |