Is the Michigan State Police really concerned about your DNA / biometric privacy?
Here’s what they say on their website
The Michigan State Police (MSP) is committed to protecting the privacy of your potentially personally identifiable data (PPID) in a strong and meaningful manner. Our privacy policy is designed to inform both members of the public and our employees about the PPID information we collect, how we use it, how we maintain it in our systems, under what circumstances you may access or correct your own information, and what we may disclose to others.
Biometric Identification Information
MSP may collect and use your biometric Information, including (but not limited to): fingerprint images, palm print images, iris images, digital images captured during your arrest or booking, and descriptive data associated with all images, identifying marks, scars, amputations, and tattoos, for identification and investigative purposes.
It may also require submission of biometric information for employment purposes. This information is protected, retained, and used in compliance with the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Records Act, Act 289 of 1925. This act also allows for data sharing between interstate, national, and international systems for criminal identification purposes.
Biometric Information may also be submitted voluntarily for specific programs, such as for identification of individuals with special health care needs, per the Fingerprinting Residents of this State Act, MCL 28.274.
DNA identification profile information may be collected, analyzed, indexed, and retained by MSP, as specified in the DNA Identification Profiling System Act, Act 250 of 1990. This act allows DNA profiles to be used for law enforcement identification purposes or to assist in the recovery or identification of human remains or missing persons. If personal identifiers are removed, it may also be used or shared for academic, research, statistical analysis, or protocol development purposes.
The following notice will be given to all individuals who provide a DNA sample (MSP FORM BID-016):
At the time a DNA sample is taken, please be advised:
(a) That, except as otherwise provided by law, your DNA sample or DNA profile, or both, shall be destroyed or expunged, as appropriate, if the charge for which the sample was obtained has been dismissed or resulted in acquittal, or no charge was filed within the limitations period.
(b) That your DNA sample or profile, or both, will not be destroyed or expunged, as appropriate, if MSP determines you are otherwise obligated to submit a sample or if it is evidence relating to another individual that would otherwise be retained under MCL 28.176.
(c) That the burden is on the arresting law enforcement agency and the prosecution to request the destruction or expunction of a DNA sample or profile as required under MCL 28.176, not on you.
Here’s what we say
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.
More Rights You Should Know
The 6th Amendment – Do You Know What It Is?
The 6th Amendment: is it still a thing?The 6th Amendment to the United States Constitution is a crucial pillar of the Bill of Rights, designed to ensure fair and just legal proceedings for individuals accused of crimes. Ratified on December 15, 1791, this amendment...
Carjacking is a Federal Offense
Carjacking is a Federal OffenseCarjacking, the act of forcibly stealing an occupied vehicle, has long been a concern for public safety. It was a local and state issue until a series of violent incidents in the early 1990s that carjacking became a federal...
Other Articles
The Takings Clauses of the United States and Michigan
These clauses protect property rights and maintain a balance between public needs and individual ownership The Takings Clauses of the United States and Michigan Constitutions are pivotal components of property law, ensuring that private property is not seized by the...
Michigan Supreme Court – People of Michigan v. Duff
A seizure may occur when a police vehicle partially blocks a defendant’s egress if thetotality of the circumstances indicate that a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave In the case of People v Duff (July 26, 2024)., the Michigan Supreme Court issued an...
Michigan Supreme Court – Money back for former homeowners
In a landmark decision, the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that counties cannot retain surplus proceeds from tax-foreclosed property sales, a move poised to return millions to former homeowners. This ruling, stemming from the case Rafaeli, LLC v. Oakland County,...
Komorn Law Case Victories
Just some of our victoriesState / 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) 357-2550More...6-30-18 United States v Neece -...
Michigan Court of Appeals – Case Summary People v Bosworth
Michigan Court of Appeals - People v. Bosworth Despite these efforts, the jury found the evidence against Bosworth compelling. In the case of People v. Christopher Mychael Bosworth, the Michigan Court of Appeals rendered a decision on July 18, 2024. Bosworth was...
Michigan Court of Appeals – Case Analysis People v. Jackson
Michigan Court of Appeals - People v MICHAEL JACKSON Several critical legal issues emerged during the trial and subsequent appeals process including self defense claim and witness credibility. In a recent decision by the Michigan Court of Appeals dated July 18, 2024,...
Michigan Supreme Court restores wage and sick leave laws
Citizen-initiated proposals aimed at increasing the minimum wage and expanding paid sick leave In a significant ruling, the Michigan Supreme Court has reinstated the original minimum wage and paid sick leave laws that were initially gutted by the legislature in 2018....
SCOTUS Decision Gives Starbucks a Win in Labor Dispute
The decision underscored the principle that only activities that are essential and directly related to an employee's primary job responsibilities are subject to compensation. In a recent decision by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), Starbucks received a...
