BieberF. R., “Turning Base Hits into Earned Runs: Improving the Effectiveness of Forensic DNA Data Bank Programs,”Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics34, no. 2 (2006): 222–233.
4.
As of the writing of this manuscript, “hit counting” is performed by the crime laboratories not by the police investigators, the district attorneys or the courts who ultimately determine the meaningfulness of database hits. Quite possibly, the impact of a hit is best measured in asking, “Did this DNA database hit increase public safety?”
5.
The SFPD Forensic Services Division provides scientific support for criminal investigations of a metropolitan area with a resident population of ∼800,000.
6.
California's DNA Cold Hit Program provided funding for local laboratories to reduce DNA backlogs in sex crimes and homicides with a sexual component by conducting wholesale typing of unsolved cases. The property crimes and ASAP programs introduced a more comprehensive case review and sample evaluation prior to laboratory analysis. ASAP and property crimes testing utilize a proactive approach to the Data Bank for identification of out-of-custody perpetrators.
7.
As of this writing, nearly 300 DNA cold hits have been obtained for SFPD criminal investigations. A participating laboratory of the National DNA Index System (NDIS) since 2001, the San Francisco Police Department Forensic Biology Unit receives less than 10% of the total DNA database hits within California and has benefitted greatly from CODIS; the overwhelming majority of the cold cases had no known suspect(s) at the time of DNA testing. For those cases with “possible” named suspects, if CODIS confirmed identification of the individual(s) in question, the hits were categorized as “warm hits.”
8.
Under the California Office of Criminal Justice Planning (OCJP) DNA Cold Hit Grant, wholesale DNA testing of more than 600 backlogged sexual assaults and homicides with sexual components were analyzed; DNA profiles suitable for CODIS upload were generated in several hundred cases.
9.
The San Francisco Medical Examiner retained a considerable number of microscope slides prepared during autopsy. Autopsy slides were on occasion the only source of perpetrator biological material available for DNA analysis; HoltC. L., “Rebuilding Cold Cases: Laboratory, Investigative and Legal Issues,” paper presented at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 56th Annual Meeting, Dallas, Texas, February 2004.
10.
The main objectives of the Property Crimes program are (1) rapid DNA analysis and (2) high percentage of perpetrator identifications. “Best evidence” includes Category 1 items such as blood, saliva, cigarette butts, and drinking containers; Category 2 items include articles of clothing, eyeglasses, etc.; Category 3 or “contact DNA” items include samples from door handles and burglary tools, etc.
11.
“Other” incidents are reported as a group and include juvenile sexual assault, felony gun possession, robbery, and other violent assaults.
12.
Cold hits were obtained in Homicide, Sex Crimes, Burglary, Robbery, Juvenile, General Work, Gang Task Force, and Night Investigations. Since 2006, cold hits have also occurred in the Hit and Run and Fencing Details.
13.
While judicial resolution is not expected in every case, the number of cases without legal filing may be somewhat inflated as many of these cold hits were generated for DNA cases in accumulated backlogs (from 1995-2004) such that complicating factors may have been introduced disproportionately by wholesale DNA testing. For property crimes, an understanding of filing thresholds and cooperation with SFDA's Office was obtained prior to program implementation. Refer to Discussion points for additional information.
14.
San Francisco Drug Court and the more recent Behavioral Health Court allow San Francisco judges to offer rehabilitative services, and potential expungement of arrests, to non-violent offenders. For more information, see KnightH., “Special Court in S.F. Offers Hope and Help to Those Short on Both,”The San Francisco Chronicle, November 13, 2007, available at <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2007/11/13/MN3ST0DCQ.DTL&type> (last visited May 14, 2010).
15.
A recent National Institute of Justice (NIJ) study suggests that burglary cases with DNA evidence are 2.5 times more likely to result in conviction by jury trial than cases without DNA evidence. Quite possibly, the DNA evidence may have changed the outcome of this jury trial; RitterN., “DNA Solves Property Crimes (But Are We Ready for That?),”National Institute of Justice Journal261, no. 261 (2008): 2–12.
16.
CookP. J.LudwigJ.BragaA. A., “Criminal Records of Homicide Offenders,”JAMA294, no. 5 (2005): 598–601.
17.
For this group of offenders (Felons #1–12 and ten randomly chosen burglars), arrests occurred in the California counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Merced, Monterey, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Solano.
18.
GrothA. N.LongoR. E.McFaddenJ. B., “Undetected Recidivism among Rapists and Child Molesters,”Crime and Delinquency28, no. 3 (1982): 450–458.
19.
One should note that only California criminal histories were analyzed in this study. Several offenders also have criminal records in neighboring states; these data were not analyzed.
20.
Offenses in Figure 2 were placed in the general categories as described. Offenses and not individual arrests were measured. For example, if an individual was arrested for kidnapping, sexual assault, and robbery, then this arrest was counted as three distinct offenses. However, if an individual was charged with multiple sexual acts in one assault (e.g., oral copulation, sodomy, rape by force), then only a single sexual offense was tallied. The authors recognize that criminal history data entries may not be complete. General trends were noted when data were inadequate to provide more accurate accounting.
21.
Past prior acts may affect sentencing guidelines in these instances and have led to more significant criminal interruption.
22.
As many of the DNA cold hits described here have only recently reached case resolution, the authors could not measure future “time to crime” estimates. In other words, after the prisoners' release for crimes with a DNA cold hit, a future study to understand recidivism rates might shed light on long-term CODIS impact.
23.
Data for homicide offenders Speer, Laudenberg, and Puckett were only included in Table 1.
ChakrabortyR.GeJ., “Statistical Weight of a DNA Match in Cold-Hit Cases,”Forensic Science Communications11, no. 3 (2009): 1–9.
27.
For the ASAP program, sexual assault “best evidence” items were submitted to the California Bureau of Forensic Services (BFS) for limited biological screening and immediate DNA analysis; items were tested with the goal of obtaining a foreign, male DNA profile within 72 hours post-assault.
28.
Only ASAP cold hits obtained before 2007 were included in this study.
29.
An in-depth analysis of these challenges – and a full policy review – is beyond the scope of this paper. Extensive literature on criminal behavior, recidivism, intervention, and re-entry programs has been published. Several literature citations on these topics follow: WillisG. M.GraceR. C., “Assessment of Community Reintegration Planning for Sex Offenders: Poor Planning Predicts Recidivism,”Criminal Justice and Behavior36, no. 5 (2009): 494–512; ZhangS. X.RobertsR. E. L.CallananV. J., “Preventing Parolees From Returning to Prison Through Community-Based Reintegration,”Crime & Delinquency52, no. 4 (2006): 551–571; CullenF. T.GendreauF., “Assessing Correctional Rehabilitation: Policy, Practice, and Prospects,”Criminal Justice 2000, no. 3 (2000): 109–175; the May 2004 United States Sentencing Commission report entitled “Measuring Recidivism: The Criminal History Computation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines,” is available at <http://www.ussc.gov/publicat/Recidivism_General.pdf> (last visited May 11, 2010
30.
McClearyR., Dangerous Men: The Sociology of Parole (Albany NY: Harrow and Heston, 1992).
31.
A study of current practices for supervision of probationers and parolees and their interaction with criminal courts may identify some underlying causes for continued violence during and after probationary periods. Improvements in these areas could reduce the need for repeated CODIS assistance to identify the same individuals.
32.
BieberF. R.BrennerC. H.LazerD., “Finding Criminals through DNA of Their Relatives,”Science312, no. 5778 (2006): 1315–1316.
33.
U.S. database laws are sometimes propelled by victim advocates affected by violent crimes. In California, a campaign led by Mr. Bruce Harrington, whose brother was a victim of murder, resulted in the November 2004 amendment of the California Penal Code Sections 295–300 to make California one of the first “all felon” and “felon arrestee” state databases. These efforts resulted in a rise in the convicted offender population from ∼300,000 to more than 1 million DNA profiles in less than three years. Other victim advocates, such as Mrs. Debbie Smith, have undertaken similar challenges to raise awareness for the DNA Data Bank to strive for database expansion. In 2004, the Debbie Smith Act was signed into law as part of the federal Justice for All Act. H.R. 5107, Public Law 108–405, available at <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/publications/factshts/justforall/welcome.html> (last visited May 11, 2010); California Penal Code Sections 295–300.2, November 3, 2004 Amendment.
Strategic Plan to Improve Forensic DNA Policy in Florida, 2008: At 5 This plan states as one objective to: “Improve laboratory efficiency by training local law enforcement agencies to select and submit best evidence rather than all evidence for analysis.” (Strategic plan prepared by Florida Department of Law Enforcement stakeholders in response to the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices Improving Forensic DNA Policy Project.) The entire report is available at <http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0810FLORIDADNAPLAN.PDF> (last visited May 11, 2010). And, the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC)-Southeast seeks to “develop best evidence policies, which will minimize the over submission of samples by prioritization of samples based on expected success rate.” Solving Property Crimes with DNA,” TECHBeat (Winter 2009): At 2. Additional information related to this study is available at: <http://www.justnet.org/TechBeat%20Files/SolvingCrimesDNA.pdf> (last visited May 11, 2010).
36.
WickenheiserR. A., “The Business Case for Using Forensic DNA Technology to Solve and Prevent Crime,”Journal of Bio-law and Business7, no. 3 (2004): 34–50.
37.
See Ritter, supra note 16. The NIJ report also states investigators were roughly 2.5 times less likely to solve property crimes cases when biological evidence was not available. Coincidentally, even when arrests were made in cases without DNA evidence, 50% less cases were charged by district attorneys. Due to the strength of DNA evidence, trends to present such testing to jurors in the majority of instances or the “CSI effect” are increasing, regardless of whether DNA information is crucial to establish elements of the case.
38.
Data derived from Performance Metrics I and II can be used in a CompStat-like approach to hold criminal justice partners accountable for cold case resolution, deploy resources as needed to promote public safety and safeguard against cases “slipping through the cracks.” The practical limitations of sharing real-time cold case information between agencies without automated cold case tracking databases are difficult to overcome. In San Francisco, the lack of a single administrative database connecting the SFPD and SFDA's Office challenges the ability to track all cold hit cases. BrattonW. J., Turnaround: How America's Top Cop Reversed the Crime Epidemic (New York: Random House, 1998): at 233.
39.
GabrielM., “Shifting Bottlenecks: From Sample Processing to Data Management,” paper presented at Bode East Advanced DNA Workshop, Captiva Island, Florida, May 2008.
40.
LockyerB., 2003 California Task Force on Forensic Services Report, 2003, at 5; the full report is available at <http://www.ag.ca.gov/publications/#forensic> (last visited May 11, 2010).
41.
The second version of California's Cold Hit Outcome Project (CHOP2) will hopefully make some initial strides as a model for state-wide cold hit tracking; however, such a system must surpass the data management solutions already in place in local agencies or accommodate data generated by the disparate systems currently used for laboratory case management without additional burden to the local labs or unreasonable workflow alterations. Due to the critical need for Cold Case Units to utilize real-time data sharing through automated case tracking databases, many laboratories are developing ‘home grown’ or other software-based solutions. The SFPD Forensic Services Division was recently awarded more than $1 million under NIJ's 2008 Efficiency Improvement Grant to develop a multi-agency, web-based DNA Cold Case Tracking module within a larger Forensic Case Management System.
42.
Speedy trial motions are referred to as Jones motions (United States v. Jones 811 F.2d 1505 86–5114 (4th Cir. 1981); admissibility hearings to determine if proper DNA testing procedures are utilized follow the third prong of Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) in San Francisco.
