New York

• S1034 (2025-26) – Relates to the establishment of a single computerized state DNA identification index and requires municipalities to expunge any DNA record stored in a municipal DNA identification index. Would amend Exec. L. §995-c to declare the DCJS index the only lawful DNA identification index in New York, expressly barring any county, city, town, village, or municipality from establishing or maintaining one — aimed at NYPD’s local index — and requiring any municipally held DNA record to be expunged within 90 days. Also bars requiring DNA from anyone other than a designated offender, extends expungement to Family Court juvenile matters, adds dismissal and non-criminal adjudication as grounds, and changes the court’s expungement authority from “may” to “shall.”
• S1909 (2025-26) – Establishes the New York state familial search policy and the release of information for familial DNA searches. Would authorize familial DNA searching where a violent felony under Penal L. §70.02 is under investigation, the crime scene profile is single-source with no match, and all other leads are exhausted, subject to a written use-and-dissemination agreement between DCJS and the requesting agency. Directs the DNA Subcommittee to develop nonbinding recommendations and the Commission on Forensic Science to adopt a New York State Familial Search Policy. Note: the bill text still carries a stale reporting deadline of December 1, 2025.
• S5153 (2025-26) – Prohibits the use of DNA phenotyping in criminal prosecutions and proceedings. Would add Exec. L. §838-c barring any law enforcement agency or officer from contracting for DNA phenotyping services — defined as predicting physical biometric information, other observable characteristics, ancestry, or familial connections from DNA. Phenotyping products could not support reasonable cause for arrest or be used in an investigation, would be inadmissible, and resulting convictions would be eligible for CPL §440.10 relief; on the effective date all phenotyping-derived biometric information in police possession must be immediately destroyed.
• S5806 (2025-26) – Relates to the powers and duties of the commission on forensic science regarding familial DNA search regulations. Direct response to the October 2023 Court of Appeals ruling permitting familial searching. Would require the Commission on Forensic Science to promulgate match standards that prohibit familial DNA searches, and add Exec. L. §995-c(10) barring any search of the state index to identify an offender who may be a biological relative of the person whose sample was acquired. Any conflicting rules, regulations, policies, or procedures would be “immediately nullified and void as against public policy.”
• S7558 (2025-26) – Relates to requiring consent of a minor’s parent, legal guardian or attorney for law enforcement collection of DNA from certain minors. Would add Exec. L. §837-y barring any police department, sheriff’s office, State Police, or other law enforcement officer from collecting a DNA sample from a person under 18 prior to that person’s lawful arrest without first obtaining the written consent of the minor’s parent, legal guardian, or attorney. Three exceptions: samples abandoned at the scene of an alleged criminal offense and not taken from the minor’s person; samples from a minor alleged to be the victim of an offense; and collection under a search warrant, court order, or other law authorizing a search for a DNA sample. “DNA sample” is defined broadly as any blood, saliva, hair, or other bodily material from which DNA can be extracted.
• A7559 (2025-26) – Genetic Privacy and Protection Act; relates to the protection of consumer genetic data in financial distress. Would add Gen. Bus. L. art. 42-A requiring consumer genetic data holders to permanently delete all consumer genetic data within 30 days of financial distress likely to lead to bankruptcy, with consumer notice within 15 days. Bars sale or transfer of genetic data in bankruptcy, restructuring, or asset liquidation, and bars any acquirer from using retained data absent explicit renewed consent; requires annual financial stability disclosures to the Department of State, with AG enforcement and penalties up to $50,000 per affected consumer. Consumer/direct-to-consumer scope — no CODIS or law enforcement application.
• S9799 (introduced 4/6/2026) – Relates to limiting the use of a victim’s DNA collected from sexual offense evidence kits.Would bar victim reference DNA from sexual offense evidence kits from being collected, indexed, stored, or uploaded to any state or local index, and from use in any unrelated investigation or as reasonable cause for arrest. Evidence flowing from a violation would be inadmissible, resulting convictions eligible for CPL §440.10 relief, and courts could enjoin violations and mandate changes to police department policies. Amends Exec. L. §§995-c and 838-a and Pub. Health L. §2805-i.

Enhanced Budget Items

• Governor Hochul unveils 2027 budget, funding for upgrades to forensic laboratories -“$6.7 million to support upgrades to forensic laboratories across the state to solve crimes more efficiently”

Arrestees: None.

Convicted Offenders: Yes.

Qualifying Crimes: Felonies and misdemeanors — excluding prostitution convictions, and cases where a court determines the person’s participation resulted from being a victim of sex trafficking. Convicted offenders pursuant to a plea agreement, as a condition of the DOCS Temporary Release Program, the DOCS CASAT Program, the DOCS Shock Incarceration Program, release on parole, post release supervision, presumptive release, conditional release, or as a condition of probation or interim probation supervision.

Time of Collection: Collected at sentencing.

Expungement: On written notice that the conviction was reversed, vacated, or pardoned.

Statutes / Case Law

NY Exec. Law § 995. Definitions

§ 995–C. State DNA Identification Index

9 NY ADC 5.143 Directing the Commissioner of the Division of Criminal Justice Services to Expand the State DNA Identification Index to Include DNA Identification Profiles Obtained From Additional Convicted Offenders

Samy F. v. Fabrizio, 176 A.D.3d 44 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., App. Div. 1D 2019). (Trial court had authority to consider whether expungement of minor defendant’s DNA records from state DNA index system (SDIS) was warranted when DNA was collected during investigatory phase of crime that resulted in a youthful offender determination for defendant; Executive Law provided discretionary authority to court with respect to DNA material collected during investigatory, preconviction phase of criminal proceeding, and defendant would otherwise have had no means to seek discretionary expungement. State Executive Law applies to testing, analyzing and retaining DNA data by city medical examiner’s office, despite statutory language referencing “state” DNA identification index).

Matter of John R., No. D-07679/19, 130 N.Y.S. 3d 911, 914-15 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. Aug. 26, 2020) (extending holding of Samy F. to youth who is adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and giving the family court the discretion to expunge his or her DNA profiles from the OCME database).

People v. Halle, 55 N.Y.S.3d 634 (Sup. Ct., Kings Cnty. 2017) (“[O]nly upon a criminal conviction and People v. Halle, 55 N.Y.S.3d 634 (Sup. Ct., Kings Cnty. 2017) (“[O]nly upon a criminal conviction and sentence is an individual required to provide DNA which, when uploaded to SDIS and CODIS, is then available for general comparison to crime scene evidence in unrelated cases”).

People v. Blank, 82 N.Y.S.3d 872 (Sup. Ct. Bronx Cnty. 2018); People v. K.M., 41 N.Y.S.3d 875 (Sup. Ct. Bronx Cnty. 2016) (Defendant, who was awaiting trial on charges for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree and related counts, was entitled to protective order against local uploading of his DNA, and thus saliva sample from defendant would only be used for comparison purposes with respect to DNA profile previously generated from swab of pistol recovered pursuant to search warrant and would not be added to state or local databases pending conviction and sentencing).

People v. White, 76 N.Y.S.3d 800 (Sup. Ct., Bronx Cnty. 2018) (“Read together, the original statute and the amended version indicate an intention by the Legislature to authorize the inclusion of DNA records in the state DNA database only after conviction of a designated offense, see § 995–c[1], [2], [3], [6] and 995–d, but placed no such restriction on what DNA records could be included in local databases”).

Gallo v. Pataki, 831 N.Y.S.2d 896 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cnty. 2007) (“Executive Law section 995–c(3) sets forth one class of people subject to testing, but does not forbid other groups from being tested. Accordingly, requiring DNA testing as a condition of parole does not violate the DNA Database law”).

People v. Washington, 37 N.Y.S. 3d 867 (Supr. Ct. Queens Cnty. 2016) (Defendant’s statutory obligation to provide a DNA sample after conviction of specified crimes is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea and, therefore, a court need not advise a defendant before he pleads guilty to said crime.)

Leslie v. City of New York (2026) – – challenge to local suspect database in NYC.

Legislative History

• A.12252 (1994) → L. 1994, ch. 737, Assembly passage July 2, 1994 (145-0), Senate July 3, 1994 (55-0) on a three-day message, approved by the Governor August 2, 1994 as Approval #75. Senate companion S.8897. Added Executive Law Article 49-B, “Commission on Forensic Science and Establishment of DNA Identification Index,” creating a 14-member Commission on Forensic Science chaired by the DCJS Commissioner with the Health Commissioner ex officio, a seven-member DNA Subcommittee holding sole authority to grant, deny, review, or modify DNA forensic laboratory accreditation through binding recommendations, and the State DNA Identification Index within DCJS. Defined “designated offender” at § 995(7) as a person convicted of and sentenced for enumerated felonies — assault (§§ 120.05, 120.10, 120.11), homicide (§§ 125.15–125.27), sex offenses (§§ 130.25, 130.30, 130.35, 130.40, 130.45, 130.50, 130.65, 130.67, 130.70), escape and related offenses where the offender had a qualifying conviction within the previous five years, and incest (§ 255.25). Established confidentiality at § 995-d, applicability at § 995-e, and penalties at § 995-f making unauthorized disclosure or use a class A misdemeanor punishable by a fine up to $10,000. Section 2 added CPL § 440.30(1-a), authorizing post-conviction forensic DNA testing motions for convictions occurring before January 1, 1996. The act took effect immediately except § 995-c, which took effect January 1, 1996 and applied to designated offenders convicted on or after that date, with no laboratory required to be accredited before January 1, 1996 or fully accredited before July 1, 1997.
• A.9037-A (1999) → L. 1999, ch. 560, signed October 18, 1999; Senate companion S.6145 substituted. Amended Exec. Law §§ 995, 995-b, 995-c, 995-d and 995-f and CPL §§ 450.10 and 450.20. Rewrote the designated-offender list at § 995(7), revised the operation of the State DNA Identification Index, and made knowing tampering with a DNA sample or collection container a class E felony.
• S.6325 (2000) → L. 2000, ch. 8, signed March 6, 2000; identical to A.9241. Amended Exec. Law § 995 and § 9 of ch. 560 of 1999. Identified which larcenies count as designated offenses — thefts from the person of another — amended § 995(7)(b) as to criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and authorized appeals of certain motions in limited cases.
• A.11723-A (2004) → L. 2004, ch. 1, pt. A, § 13, signed July 23, 2004; Senate companion S.7685 substituted. The Anti-Terrorism Preparedness Act of 2004, a public-safety omnibus that established the State Office of Homeland Security and the statewide wireless network. Part A, § 13 amended the designated-offender list at Exec. Law § 995(7)(a).
• S.7659 (2004) → L. 2004, ch. 138, signed July 6, 2004; Assembly companion A.11721 substituted. Amended Exec. Law § 995 and CPL § 440.30. Made all offenders required to register under the Sex Offender Registration Act, plus persons convicted of various other felonies or attempts, designated offenders for DNA submission, and authorized a court to give a defendant information on the location of specified evidence.
• S.7360-B (2004) → L. 2004, ch. 175, signed July 20, 2004; Assembly companion A.11549-A substituted. Amended Exec. Law § 835 to include the Onondaga County Center for Forensic Sciences Laboratory in the definition of “qualified agencies,” giving the lab access to criminal records, personal appearance data, latent print comparisons, photographs, and handwriting samples in a forensic laboratory setting.
• S.7686 (2004) → L. 2004, ch. 576, signed October 5, 2004; Assembly companion A.11764 substituted. A cleanup bill for ch. 138, making technical corrections to the designated-offender provisions and adding aggravated harassment of an employee by an inmate and unlawful wearing of a body vest as DNA-qualifying crimes.
• S.8446 (2006) → L. 2006, ch. 2, signed June 23, 2006; Assembly companion A.11951-A substituted. Amended Exec. Law § 995 to provide for DNA testing in felony cases and in certain misdemeanors — the first major move away from the enumerated-offense model.
• S.6934 (2006) → L. 2006, ch. 91, § 2, signed June 7, 2006; same as A.10193. Amended Correction Law § 168-a and Exec. Law § 995, making compelling prostitution a sex offense and thereby triggering both registration and the DNA sample requirement.
• S.6277-B (2006) → L. 2006, ch. 320, § 26, signed July 26, 2006; Assembly companion A.9305 substituted. Restructured the crime of incest into first, second, and third degrees across the Penal Law, CPL, Correction Law, and other titles. Section 26 conformed the designated-offender list at Exec. Law § 995(7)(a) to the new offense structure.
• S.6987-A (2010) → L. 2010, ch. 405, § 6, signed August 13, 2010; Assembly companion A.10161-A substituted. Added Penal Law Article 121, creating criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation and strangulation in the first and second degrees. Section 6 amended Exec. Law § 995 so the new offenses are DNA-qualifying.
• S.6733 (2012) → L. 2012, ch. 19, §§ 5–6, signed March 19, 2012; same as A.9555. New York’s all-crimes DNA law. Amended CPL §§ 240.40, 440.10 and 440.30 and Exec. Law §§ 995 and 995-c, expanding both the categories of offenders required to submit DNA and the availability of post-conviction DNA testing and discovery.
• S.6255-D (2012) → L. 2012, ch. 55, pt. A, signed March 30, 2012; Assembly companion A.9055 substituted. The Public Protection and General Government budget bill. Part A amended § 9 of ch. 19 of 2012, striking “October” and substituting “August 1, 2012,” accelerating the all-crimes DNA effective date by two months.

• No program or law identified, except for NYPD Using ANDE Rapid DNA for reference samples only (NYC Office of Chief Medical Examiner).

• No specific program or law found, but some laboratory materials and subcommittee on IGG.
• Forensic Biology Administrative Manual – February 5, 2026 – Investigative Genetic Genealogy Testing.

• No program or law identified.
• NYPD received a FY2022 SAKI grant ($1.5M) for LODNA collection from offenders/arrestees not yet in CODIS. SAKI grantee table

• No program or law identified.