Police often rely on DNA evidence to help solve crimes, while prosecutors rely on it to hold alleged criminals accountable under the law. Some prosecutors, for example, will point to DNA evidence possibly linking those charged with first-degree murder to an alleged crime. DNA evidence can also exonerate someone wrongly accused or convicted of a crime, such as those who are convicted of rape. Rulings can be overturned after spending years in prison.
Police first used DNA technology in their criminal investigations in the 1980s. Today, thanks to technological advancements and legal acceptance of the practice, DNA evidence is widely used to convict and exonerate suspects. Even though it is available though, in many cases it still is not utilized. According to law reform advocates, more than 400,000 rape kits have gone untested in the United States. Part of the blame formerly lay with Illinois, which until recently had a backlog of unanalyzed DNA samples.
In 2010, Illinois became the first state to require DNA testing of all evidence collected from reported sex crimes. This landmark law came after the Chicago Tribune reported that there were untested rape tests languishing on storage shelves. Under this law, police departments must submit the collected DNA evidence to the Illinois State Police crime lab within 10 days. The lab in turn must report the results within six months, if resources allow. The law applies not only to future DNA evidence, but also to the previously untested samples, which Illinois police say have now been analyzed. Of those 4,000 cases, 927 matched a profile in the national DNA database. Those cases could potentially–but not automatically–be solved.
Constitutional Concerns with Using DNA Evidence
There are constitutional concerns, however. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and critics of DNA evidence argue that taking a person’s DNA constitutes such a seizure. The U.S. Supreme Court considered an aspect of this argument in a recent case involving a person arrested for a “serious offense.” The police fingerprinted and photographed him, and then collected a cheek swab to analyze his DNA. The Court held in Maryland v. King that the police had probable cause to arrest him for this “serious offense,” and that the cheek swab was as legitimate of a police booking procedure as fingerprinting. What exactly constitutes a “serious offense” under this holding is unclear and could pose legal questions down the line.
Contact an Illinois Criminal Defense Attorney
The bottom line is that the use of DNA evidence in police investigations and court proceedings can make or break your case. It could mean the difference between you being eliminated as a suspect or being charged with a crime, and between being convicted and being acquitted. Our skilled Illinois criminal defense attorneys at the Law Offices of Thomas Glasgow, Ltd. have years of experience handling cases involving the use of DNA evidence. We assist those in Chicago and its surrounding Cook County areas.