Michigan DNA Collection – The Law

Chapter 750
Act 328 of 1931
328-1931-LXXVI

THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931

Here’s the website info

750.520m DNA identification profiling; chemical testing; manner of collecting and transmitting samples; existing DNA identification profile; assessment; definitions.

Sec. 520m.

(1) A person shall provide samples for chemical testing for DNA identification profiling or a determination of the sample’s genetic markers and shall provide samples for chemical testing if any of the following apply:

(a) The individual is arrested for committing or attempting to commit a felony offense or an offense that would be a felony if committed by an adult.

(b) The person is convicted of, or found responsible for, a felony or attempted felony, or any of the following misdemeanors or local ordinances that are substantially corresponding to the following misdemeanors:

(i) A violation of section 167(1)(c), (f), or (i), disorderly person by window peeping, engaging in indecent or obscene conduct in public, or loitering in a house of ill fame or prostitution.

(ii) A violation of section 335a(1), indecent exposure.

(iii) A violation punishable under section 451(1) or (2), first and second prostitution violations.

(iv) A violation of section 454, leasing a house for purposes of prostitution.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), if at the time the person is arrested for, convicted of, or found responsible for the violation the investigating law enforcement agency or the department of state police already has a sample from the person that meets the requirements of the DNA identification profiling system act, 1990 PA 250, MCL 28.171 to 28.176, the person is not required to provide another sample or pay the assessment required under subsection (5).

(3) The county sheriff or the investigating law enforcement agency shall collect and transmit the samples in the manner required under the DNA identification profiling system act, 1990 PA 250, MCL 28.171 to 28.176.

(4) An investigating law enforcement agency, prosecuting agency, or court that has in its possession a DNA identification sample obtained from a person under subsection (1) shall forward the DNA identification sample to the department of state police after the person from whom the sample was taken has been charged with committing or attempting to commit a felony offense or an offense that would be a felony if committed by an adult unless the department of state police already has a DNA identification profile of the person.

(5) The court shall order each person found responsible for or convicted of 1 or more crimes listed in subsection (1) to pay an assessment of $60.00. The assessment required under this subsection is in addition to any fine, costs, or other assessments imposed by the court.

(6) An assessment required under subsection (5) shall be ordered upon the record, and shall be listed separately in the adjudication order, judgment of sentence, or order of probation.

(7) After reviewing a verified petition by a person against whom an assessment is imposed under subsection (5), the court may suspend payment of all or part of the assessment if it determines the person is unable to pay the assessment.

(8) The court that imposes the assessment prescribed under subsection (5) may retain 10% of all assessments or portions of assessments collected for costs incurred under this section and shall transmit that money to its funding unit. On the last day of each month, the clerk of the court shall transmit the assessments or portions of assessments collected under this section as follows:

(a) Twenty-five percent to the county sheriff or other investigating law enforcement agency that collected the DNA sample as designated by the court to defray the costs of collecting DNA samples.

(b) Sixty-five percent to the state treasurer for deposit in the justice system fund created in section 181 of the revised judicature act of 1961, 1961 PA 236, MCL 600.181.

(9) As used in this section:

(a) “DNA identification profile” and “DNA identification profiling” mean those terms as defined in section 2 of the DNA identification profiling system act, 1990 PA 250, MCL 28.172.

(b) “Investigating law enforcement agency” means the law enforcement agency responsible for the investigation of the offense for which the person is arrested or convicted. Investigating law enforcement agency includes the county sheriff but does not include a probation officer employed by the department of corrections.

(c) “Felony” means a violation of a penal law of this state for which the offender may be punished by imprisonment for more than 1 year or an offense expressly designated by law to be a felony.

(d) “Sample” means a portion of a person’s blood, saliva, or tissue collected from the person.

Here’s what we say

Attorney Michael Komorn

State / Federal Legal Defense

With extensive experience in criminal legal defense since 1993 from pre-arrest, District, Circuit, Appeals, Supreme and the Federal court systems.

KOMORN LAW (248) 357-2550

Don’t talk to the police before, during or after your Miranda rights have been read without a lawyer present. If you do limit your information because what you say locks you into what you said. Just because you are not under arrest or being detained does not mean what you say will not be used against you.

Here is some information to review.

Don’t worry, a copy of your DNA has not been sent off to the Government Mountain Storage Facility for permanant storage out of view, or has it?

Legal Counsel and Your Rights

When facing legal challenges, particularly in criminal cases, it is advisable to seek legal counsel immediately.

An experienced attorney can provide guidance on how to navigate interactions with law enforcement while safeguarding your constitutional rights.

Since 1993 our expert legal defense in navigating criminal law matters and protecting your constitutional rights are what we eat for breakfast everyday.

Contact Komorn Law PLLC if you’re ready to fight and win.

Research us and then call us.

Tap to Call Komorn Law Now

More Rights You Should Know

Miranda v Arizona

Case Summary Miranda v. Arizona established that before police conduct custodial interrogation, they must advise suspects of their rights: the right to remain silent, that statements may be used against them, and the right to an attorney. These “Miranda warnings”...

What could happen when you click the – I agree – box?

Wrongful death suit against Disney serves as a warning to consumers when clicking ‘I agree’A wrongful death lawsuit involving Walt Disney Parks and Resorts highlights the critical importance for consumers to meticulously review the fine print before registering for a...

Other Articles

Michigan Cannabis Tax Fraud Cases Are Rising

Hands up CaponeMichigan’s regulated cannabis industry is in a very different place than it was when medical marijuana and adult-use legalization were the primary battlegrounds. As prices compress, margins disappear, and tax burdens increase, enforcement doesn’t...

Deadlocked Jury – What does it mean?

A deadlocked jury is often called a hung jury—A deadlocked jury—often called a hung jury—occurs when jurors cannot reach the unanimous (or legally required) agreement needed to deliver a verdict. In criminal cases, most jurisdictions require unanimity. When the jury...

Social Security Scams – What to Know

The Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) have issued several warnings about ongoing Social Security scams and continue to advise caution to the public. Here are some of the popular Social Security scams to watch out for in...

Court to Allow Challenge to Michigan’s New 24% Cannabis Tax

Summary A Michigan Court of Claims judge has ruled that the lawsuit challenging the state’s newly enacted 24% wholesale marijuana excise tax may proceed. The ruling, issued January 5, 2026, keeps alive a significant constitutional challenge brought by industry groups...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Arrest

People v Lyons, No 370840, ___ Mich App ___, ___ NW3d ___ (May 13, 2025)Case Summary In People v Lyons, the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle stopped by police. Before the vehicle fully stopped, he exited and began walking away. Officers ordered him to return, he...

Michigan Drivers Face Higher Gas Tax in 2026

Keep Pushing.Summary Michigan’s fuel‑tax structure will undergo a major statutory shift on January 1, 2026, raising the state gas tax from 31 cents to approximately 52.4 cents per gallon. The change eliminates the 6% sales tax on fuel and replaces it with a higher,...

Michigan Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Cases – Manslaughter

Case Summary These two cases examine the boundaries of involuntary manslaughter. In People v Aiyash, a gas‑station clerk locked an agitated customer and three patrons inside the store, after which the customer shot the patrons. In People v Sherrill, the defendant...

Michigan begins 2026 with New Laws

Michigan’s 2026 legal landscape includes major tax reforms—most notably the gas‑tax increase from 31¢ to 52.4¢ per gallon—along with cannabis tax changes, wage increases, consumer protections, and transparency laws.Michigan begins 2026 with a slate of new laws...