Sexual assault forensic evidence: testing.

Senator Wahab, with coauthor Senator Ochoa Bogh, advances a measure that reconfigures the Sexual Assault Victims’ DNA rights framework by placing an adult survivor’s testing decision at the forefront, including a new option to pause testing if the survivor is undecided about reporting to law enforcement. The bill’s findings underscore DNA analysis as a tool for investigation and prosecution and emphasize the obligations of law enforcement to handle, retain, and inform victims about forensic testing and case developments.

A core change authorizes a survivor aged 18 or older who is undecided about reporting to request that all medical evidence collected during an examination not be tested. If the request is made at the time of the examination, the medical facility must not submit the kit to a crime laboratory, and the investigating agency must retain the kit until testing is requested. If the request is made after the examination, the agency may retain the kit, or the laboratory may return an untested kit to the agency for retention, depending on whether testing has begun. A survivor who initially opts out may later request testing. The measure also codifies survivor rights to information about testing status, access to a state portal for kit information, and notification about whether a DNA profile was obtained, whether it was uploaded to CODIS, and whether there is a confirmed match to the Convicted Offender DNA Database, subject to ongoing investigations. It creates a survivor-designated advocate option to receive required information and imposes documentation requirements for transfers that are not considered testing submissions.

Key mechanisms surround timeline, retention, and enforcement. The bill maintains the existing framework that law enforcement must route evidence to a crime lab within a 20‑day window or implement a rapid turnaround program that transfers evidence within five days, and it requires the lab to process evidence or transmit it to another lab with specified deadlines and CODIS-upload provisions. It expands notification duties: upon request, agencies must inform victims of testing status (with oral or written responses, and optional written requests), and victims gain access to the SAFE-T database portal for kit information. It also requires agencies to notify victims if DNA analysis is not completed within a designated period prior to the statutory testing window, and it extends retention timelines for unsolved cases to 20 years, or to the victim’s 40th birthday if the survivor was under 18 at the time of the offense, with at least 60 days’ prior written notice before destruction. Finally, the measure designates mandamus as the sole civil or criminal remedy for certain compliance failures and anticipates a local-mandate reimbursement process if costs are deemed mandated.

Implementation and policy context focus on coordination, privacy, and resource implications. Local investigating agencies gain new duties to retain or return untested kits in response to survivor requests, maintain chain-of-custody records for transfers, respond to survivor inquiries, and manage extended retention and destruction notices. Coordination with medical facilities and crime laboratories, changes to chain-of-custody practices, and IT considerations for the SAFE-T portal are integral to implementation, along with privacy protections and data governance for survivor-accessible information. The measure contemplates reimbursement mechanisms for any mandated local costs and anticipates an increased administrative burden and storage logistics, balanced by a framework designed to expand survivor information rights and testing options within the existing CODIS-era testing regime.