Supreme Court DNA ruling hasn’t made changes locally

Photo by: The News-Gazette

Peter Buckley, deputy chief at the Douglas County Sheriff's office, holds cotton swabs, which are used to swab the inside of a mouth for DNA sampling. Two sets of swabs are used for each inside cheek, with the cheeks being swabbed six times each.

Image

While the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month upheld the police practice of taking DNA samples from persons who have been arrested but not convicted of a crime, it hasn't yet translated into additional swabbing for DNA by area law enforcement.

But some area sheriff's offices are looking at setting up DNA-testing policies in light of the court's decision.

The court ruled 5-4 that DNA sampling after an arrest "for a serious offense" and when officers "bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody" does not violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches.

Under those specifications, the court said in the decision, "taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee's DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment."

Douglas County Chief Deputy Peter Buckley said there has been no increase in DNA swabbing there so far.

"We have been doing swabbing on an occasional basis," Buckley said. "Right now, if we believe a suspect's DNA is at the crime scene, we will ask to do swabbing. Especially in sexual assault cases, there can be DNA left at the scene that can provide evidence.

"Then we will take DNA from inside a person's cheek and see if it matches the DNA that was left from the sexual assault."

Read this article:
Supreme Court DNA ruling hasn't made changes locally