Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Justice Dna Database topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah Senate approves SB277 allowing DNA collection at booking with privacy safeguards
Summary
The Senate passed Senate Bill 277 as amended to permit DNA collection at booking with processing limited until after preliminary hearings or waiver, an expungement process for those not convicted, and a requirement that analyses use FBI‑approved forensic markers; amendment No. 3 was adopted to narrow markers and add procedural safeguards.
Senators approved Senate Bill 277 on final passage after adopting an amendment intended to narrow how DNA is sampled and handled.
Sponsor Senator Adams told the Senate the bill "allows DNA to be collected upon booking," but that samples "will be processed and only can be processed upon a preliminary hearing or upon waiver of that preliminary hearing." He said the bill is designed to balance crime‑prevention with due process and noted the fiscal framework is intended to be revenue neutral: "Those that have been convicted will pay for this DNA sample" and the fee collected from convicted individuals would increase from $100 to $150.
Senator McAdams moved Amendment No. 3, saying it "accomplishes a few things" to tighten privacy protections. McAdams told colleagues the amendment limits the DNA profile to nonmedical identification markers (described in debate as the forensic "junk" markers) and requires that "the DNA analysis be consistent with and not exceed FBI forensic DNA analysis procedures." The amendment also created an expungement pathway: an individual who is not convicted may seek destruction of collected DNA evidence upon receipt of an appropriate court order.
During floor discussion Senator Greiner raised chain‑of‑custody and booking logistics, urging clearer wording so county booking facilities, not every arresting agency, handle and retain samples until court action. Senator Romero pressed whether samples would be destroyed automatically upon exoneration; sponsors said automatic destruction created technical burdens and that the adopted approach places responsibility on the individual to obtain a court order to remove the sample. Romero said she could not support a bill that requires a person found innocent to take affirmative steps to secure destruction.
Senate debate included examples cited by the sponsor about how post‑booking DNA has solved multiple cases and overturned wrongful convictions, and proponents emphasized the amendment as a limiting, privacy‑protective change. The chamber recorded 23 yes votes, 1 no and 5 absent; the bill as amended will be forwarded to the House for its consideration.
What's next: SB277 as amended will be transmitted to the House; floor debate noted potential implementation work (chain‑of‑custody, coordination with booking facilities, and specification of expungement procedures) that staff and agencies may need to resolve during the committee process or at the House.
