Utah Legislature: Senate votes to expand DNA collection from crime suspects

SALT LAKE CITY — Under proposed legislation passed Monday, Utah may be collecting DNA samples from thousands of additional people accused of violent crimes.

SB277 would require the state to collect DNA samples from all people arrested for violent crimes, rather than waiting until after conviction.

Similar laws have passed around the country, despite lawsuits and vocal opposition from civil-liberties advocates.

"This is about convicting those that are guilty and exonerating those that are innocent," said the bill's sponsor, Sen. Stuart Adams, R-Layton.

Adams was joined at the Capitol by advocates Ed and Lois Smart, whose daughter Elizabeth was kidnapped in 2002.

Although such DNA checking would have had no use in his daughter's case, Ed Smart said the expanded system would provide help for parents like him.

"The nightmare continues for so many parents out there," he said. "This will stop predators from being able to prey. This is a wonderful day for so many victims out there."

Smart said the bill is designed to stop repeat offenders and end "the cycle of violence."

Under the proposal, DNA from people accused of violent felonies would be collected upon booking into jail, and the information resulting from the DNA analysis would then be entered into a national database after a preliminary hearing. If a person is acquitted, they could petition to have the DNA data destroyed.

Proponents argue that DNA is the "fingerprint of the 21st century" and should be used to prevent crime.

Nationwide, such expanded DNA-collection laws have been referred to as "Katie's Law," a reference to a New Mexico law passed after Katie Sepich, a 22-year-old New Mexico State University student, was brutally raped and murdered in August 2003.

Smart said the bill would allow law enforcement officials to be "proactive," without waiting for more tragedies to happen.

But stockpiling DNA samples has many civil libertarians worried.

"The bottom line is that these people have not been convicted," said American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Marina Lowe. "While the intent may be good, we have no idea how the government may use this in the future."

While she concedes the Utah proposal is more limited than some others, Lowe said it would still infringe on constitutional rights.