Forensic testing: DNA samples.

(1) Existing law, as amended by the DNA Fingerprint, Unsolved Crime and Innocence Protection Act, Proposition 69, approved by the voters at the November 2, 2004, general election (the DNA Act) requires any adult person who is arrested or charged with any felony offense to provide buccal swab samples, right thumbprints, and a full palm print impression of each hand, and any blood specimens or other biological samples required for law enforcement identification analysis. Existing law requires that blood specimens and buccal swab samples be forwarded promptly to the Department of Justice for analysis. Existing case law, People v. Buza (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 1446, for which review has been granted by the California Supreme Court, holds that the DNA Act, to the extent it requires felony arrestees to submit to a DNA sample for law enforcement analysis and inclusion in the state and federal DNA databases, without independent suspicion, a warrant, or a judicial or grand jury determination of probable cause, unreasonably intrudes on the arrestee's expectation of privacy and is invalid under the California Constitution. The DNA Act provides that it may be amended by a statute passed by each house of the Legislature that furthers the purpose of the measure. This bill would state that it is the intention of the Legislature to further the purposes of the DNA Act in light of the above-specified case law. The bill would, if the California Supreme Court rules to uphold People v. Buza, require that a blood specimen or buccal swab sample taken from a person arrested for the commission of a felony be forwarded to the department after a felony arrest warrant has been signed by a judicial officer, a grand jury indictment has been found and issued, or a judicial determination of probable cause to believe the person has committed the offense for which he or she was arrested has been made. (2) Existing law, as amended by the DNA Act, requires that a DNA specimen and sample be destroyed and that a searchable database profile be expunged from that databank program if the person from whom the specimen or sample was collected has no past or present offense or pending charge which qualifies that person for inclusion in the database and if that person submits an application, as specified. Existing law gives the court discretion to grant or deny the application. This bill would, if the California Supreme Court rules to uphold People v. Buza, require the DNA specimen and sample to be destroyed and the searchable database profile expunged from the database without the requirement of an application.