tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post7147801107522223600..comments2008-09-21T21:25:06.271-04:00Danielle Riendeauhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11839404928721376456noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-72430895370047121.post-74219723774570818042008-09-19T23:16:00.000-04:002008-09-19T23:16:00.000-04:00I had a question about Massachusetts' DNA law - the mandatory DNA collection for DNA database - for ALL persons convicted of "felony" charges. If someone without a prior criminal record is involved in a drunk driving crash that involves injuries and is subsequently found guilty of a "felony" charge (OUI with serious injury), is this a valid basis to seize this person's blood and forever keep this person's DNA on file? It is my understanding that the DNA database is to track and store the DNA of violent criminals who have committed willful acts of violence on others and are "likely to reoffend?" Would this person, a convicted felon for drunk driving, have a legitimate claim that his rights have been violated and that the law as applied - to "all felonies" itself is in violation of our privacy and liberty interests without a legitimate basis?Johnnoreply@blogger.com