SB 140 amends Utah’s DNA collection and processing rules for law enforcement. The bill changes when a DNA specimen taken at booking may be analyzed, adding a new circumstance that allows processing 60 days after an arrest warrant is issued if the warrant remains outstanding. It also clarifies when a person may be charged a $150 DNA collection fee, limiting that fee to cases involving a class A misdemeanor or felony-level offense arising from the same criminal episode, and it makes related technical changes to the DNA collection and database statutes.
The bill also expands notice requirements and DNA-destruction procedures. Prosecutors must notify certain charged individuals of their rights to seek destruction of a DNA specimen and removal of DNA records when charges are dismissed with prejudice, result in acquittal, or a conviction or order is reversed. The bill preserves existing rules requiring the Bureau of Criminal Identification to store, analyze, protect, and destroy DNA specimens under specified conditions, and it maintains criminal penalties for unauthorized disclosure, misuse, or failure to destroy DNA information when required.
Impact
SB 140 amends Sections 53-10-404.5 and 53-10-406 of the Utah Code, affecting law enforcement booking procedures, the Bureau of Criminal Identification’s DNA database and specimen handling duties, and the rights of people whose DNA is collected. It changes the timing for DNA analysis in cases with outstanding arrest warrants, clarifies fee liability tied to convictions, and adds a prosecutor notification duty regarding destruction requests. The bill does not appropriate money, but it affects sheriffs, prosecutors, the bureau, and individuals whose DNA is collected at booking.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad overall support, passing the Senate and House with comfortable margins and unanimous or near-unanimous committee recommendations in the House. Final House passage was unanimous, and the Senate concurred with the House amendment by a wide margin, suggesting general agreement with the bill’s law-enforcement and administrative updates. The voting pattern indicates the measure was not highly controversial overall, though it did draw some dissent in earlier Senate floor votes.
Contention
The main points of contention likely centered on the expanded authority to process DNA after an outstanding arrest warrant has been pending for 60 days and on the scope of fee collection for DNA specimens. Those provisions balance investigative utility and administrative efficiency against privacy and fairness concerns for individuals who have not yet been convicted. Another possible area of concern is the added prosecutor notice requirement and the procedures for destruction of DNA records, which reflect civil-liberties and due-process interests in limiting retention of DNA from cases that end without conviction.
Relating to the deceased, including requirements for donating or claiming bodies or anatomical specimens, the licensing and regulation of persons who provide services or conduct education or research in relation to the deceased, and responsibilities of political subdivisions for certain bodies after death; creating criminal offenses; authorizing administrative penalties; requiring occupational licenses; authorizing fees.
A bill for an act requiring employees of the department of transportation to provide a specimen for alcohol and drug analysis following a motor vehicle accident or collision resulting in injury or death, and making penalties applicable.(See HF 788.)
A bill for an act requiring state employees to provide a specimen for alcohol and drug analysis following certain motor vehicle accidents or collisions resulting in serious injury or death under certain circumstances, and making penalties applicable. (Formerly HF 162.)
A bill for an act relating to medical personnel authorized to withdraw a specimen of blood from a person suspected of operating while intoxicated.(See HF 935.)