Some states cite expense, some say they don't have enough storage room, but about half of the states in the country do not have regulations that require the preservation of DNA evidence for murder, sexual assault and other serious crimes.
USA Today reported what some states are doing:
• South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford vetoed a proposal last month that, in part, would have mandated preservation of biological evidence. He says he supports giving the "wrongly accused a chance to clear their names" but could not endorse a provision requiring all suspects charged with felonies -- but not yet convicted -- to provide genetic profiles.
• A similar proposal in New York, one of the largest states that do not require DNA preservation, died in the State Assembly in June.
• Colorado prosecutors and defense lawyers are grappling to implement a broad law that requires law enforcement agencies to keep DNA evidence in murder, sexual assault and other serious cases for the lifetime of convicted defendants. It also calls for keeping DNA evidence in less serious crimes.
• Arizona lawmakers approved legislation, which takes effect Dec. 31, to maintain biological evidence in murder and sexual assault cases for as long as the offender remains in prison.
Larry Pozner, former head of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers [NACDL], says states have shown a "shocking" disinterest in keeping DNA: "Innocent inmates are going to die in prison."
Just this week,
NACDL announced:
Virginia's forensic laboratory system should notify people convicted during the years 1973 to 1988 that biological evidence in their cases has been found in the laboratory's files that could be suitable for DNA analysis.
See
this story from the Los Angeles Times on how reliable DNA evidence really is.
