Md. DNA Law In Front Of SCOTUS Aided 43 Cases

By JESSICA GRESKO Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) A Maryland DNA law being challenged in the U.S. Supreme Court helped lead to 43 convictions over the past four years, but state data shows the majority of the convictions could eventually have happened even without the new law.

For years, Maryland required people convicted of serious crimes to provide a DNA sample. The sample, taken from a swab of saliva, was then compared against a database of DNA evidence from crime scenes, and some old cases were able to be solved. Maryland changed its law in 2009, however, so that people had to provide the saliva sample when they were arrested on charges of committing certain violent crimes before going to trial.

The change is at the center of a U.S. Supreme Court case being argued Tuesday. Opponents say the law violates a persons constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. But supporters of the law, including Maryland Gov. Martin OMalley and Attorney General Douglas Gansler, say taking DNA from arrestees is an important law enforcement tool used by 27 other states and the federal government. They say it is no more invasive than taking a persons fingerprints.

Law enforcement has been taking fingerprints forever, Gansler said in a telephone interview Friday.

The state has now taken more than 33,000 DNA samples as a result of the expansion. Those samples have led to 73 arrests and 43 convictions, with sentences ranging from probation to life in prison. The majority of the convictions were for burglary or theft; seven were for rape or sex offenses.

But 29 of the convictions could have happened even if Maryland hadnt extended its law to arrestees, according to state data. Thats because those people were ultimately convicted of the offense for which their DNA was taken. Their DNA would have been collected even under the old law, though law enforcement would have had to wait until after their conviction.

For example, William Edward Burton III was arrested after being accused of attempted murder and rape. Officials took DNA and matched it to a rape that happened in Massachusetts from 1995. But because Burton ultimately pleaded guilty in the first case, his DNA would have been collected and would have ultimately led officials to the Massachusetts rape.

The attorney who prosecuted Burtons case, Elizabeth Ireland, said taking DNA from arrestees is still important because many cases dont end like Burtons.

Not all arrestees are convicted, especially when its a crime like a rape. Rape is one of the most under-reported and under-charged crimes, said Ireland, who also prosecuted the case that is before the Supreme Court.

Follow this link:
Md. DNA Law In Front Of SCOTUS Aided 43 Cases