The Nevada Assembly Committee has recently approved a bill that would allow authorities to collect DNA samples from defendants arrested for certain crimes rather than waiting until they are convicted. Opponents of the new law, however, say that the bill violates defendants' constitutional rights.
Currently, in the state of Nevada, police can only collect DNA samples from individuals after they are convicted of certain crimes. The new bill, known as Brianna's Law (AB 552), would, however, allow authorities to collect DNA samples from defendants upon arrest.
Legislatures were encouraged to move forward with the bill after Brianna Denison-whom the bill is named after-was abducted and murdered in 2008 by a serial rapist. Family and friends argue that if authorities would've been allowed to collect the perpetrator's DNA sample when he was first accused of rape in December 2007, his identity would've been revealed and Brianna might still be alive.
However, some say that allowing sensitive genetic information like DNA to be collected upon arrest-as opposed to fingerprints-is a violation of a defendant's constitutional rights.
Specifically, opponents claim that the procedure violates defendant's Fourth Amendment rights to privacy due to DNA's personal, genetic nature. Others argue that forcing individuals to submit DNA samples when they are arrested simply violates their Fifth Amendment rights to due process because they have yet to receive their day in court and is innocent until proven guilty Nevertheless, high courts in several jurisdictions across the country have ruled that the procedure is not unconstitutional.
The bill will most likely pass through the requisite hoops and eventually signed into law, considering 24 others states have already passed laws that allow police to collect DNA samples of individuals prior to any conviction.
Currently, the bill sits before the Nevada Ways and Means Committee for review.
