Table 1.
State policies for familial searching and partial match disclosure
States with formal familial searching policies | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Parameter | California | Colorado | Texas | Virginia |
Proportionality | ||||
Violent crimes | X | X | X | X |
Nonviolent crimes | X | |||
CODIS offenders searched | ||||
Convicted offenders | X | X | X | X |
Arrestees | X | X | X | |
Tools for narrowing suspect pool | ||||
IBS | X | X | X | X |
Likelihood ratio | X | X | X | X |
YSTR analysis | X | X | X | X |
Other policy specifics | ||||
Requires profiles on all 13 CODIS loci | X | X | X | X |
Requires evidence profile to be single source | X | X | ||
Permits mixtures with clearly defined profiles | X | X | ||
Oversight committee | Xa | Xb | ||
Requires specialized training of law enforcement | X | |||
Requires public record verification before follow-up | X | |||
States permitting partial match disclosure [4] | ||||
Arizona, Connecticutc, Florida, Missouri and Nebraskad, Nevada, New York, Oregon and Washington Statee, Wyoming |
CODIS = Combined DNA Index System; IBS = identity-by-state; YSTR = Y-chromosome short tandem repeat. aFamilial Search Committee. bCommittee of four CODIS analysts recommends when to conduct familial searches. cRestricted to profiles where a genetic similarity "must raise the hair on the back of the analyst's neck to be worth pursuing" (Ram (2011) [4], p 770). d"Targeted analysis" may be conducted on a case-by-case basis and upon specific request (Ram (2011) [4], p 772). ePolicy addresses partial matches derived from routine moderate-stringency searches.