Ark. Code Ann. § 12-12-1109 (2026)
DNA sample required upon adjudication of guilt
-
A person who is adjudicated guilty for a qualifying offense on or after August 1, 1997, shall have a DNA sample drawn as follows:
-
- A person who is adjudicated guilty for a qualifying offense and sentenced to a term of confinement for that qualifying offense shall have a DNA sample drawn upon intake to a prison, jail, or any other detention facility or institution.
- If the person is already confined at the time of sentencing, the person shall have a DNA sample drawn immediately after the sentencing;
-
- A person who is adjudicated guilty for a qualifying offense shall have a DNA sample drawn as a condition of any sentence in which disposition will not involve an intake into a prison, jail, or any other detention facility or institution.
- Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the agency supervising the convicted offender shall determine the time and collection of the DNA sample;
- A person who is acquitted on the grounds of mental disease or defect of the commission of a qualifying offense and committed to an institution or other facility shall have a DNA sample drawn upon intake to that institution or other facility; and
- Under no circumstance shall a person who is adjudicated guilty for a qualifying offense be released in any manner after this disposition unless a DNA sample has been drawn.
-
- A person who has been adjudicated guilty for a qualifying offense before August 1, 1997, and who is still serving a term of confinement in connection therewith on August 1, 1997, shall not be released in any manner prior to the expiration of his or her maximum term of confinement unless and until a DNA sample has been drawn.
- All DNA samples taken pursuant to this section shall be taken in accordance with rules promulgated by the State Crime Laboratory in consultation with the Division of Correction, the Division of Community Correction, the Department of Human Services, and the Administrative Office of the Courts.
-
- When the state accepts a person from another state under any interstate compact or under any other reciprocal agreement with any county, state, or federal agency or any other provision of law, whether or not the person is confined or released, the acceptance is conditional on the person's providing a DNA sample if the person was convicted of an offense in any other jurisdiction which would be considered a qualifying offense as defined in § 12-12-1103(9) if committed in this state or if the person was convicted of an equivalent offense in any other jurisdiction.
- The person shall provide the DNA sample in accordance with the rules of the custodial institution or supervising agency.
-
- The requirements of this subchapter are mandatory and apply regardless of whether or not a court advises a person that a DNA sample must be provided to the State DNA Data Base and State DNA Data Bank as a condition of probation or parole.
- A person who has been sentenced to death or life without the possibility of parole or to any life or indeterminate term of incarceration is not exempt from the requirements of this subchapter.
- Any person subject to this subchapter who has not provided a DNA sample for any reason, including the person's release prior to July 16, 2003, an oversight, or because of the person's transfer from another jurisdiction, shall give a DNA sample for inclusion in the data base after being notified by the supervising agency.
- In the event that a person's DNA sample is not adequate for any reason, the person shall provide another DNA sample for analysis.
History. Acts 1997, No. 737, § 9; 2001, No. 218, § 1; 2003, No. 1265, § 6[5]; 2003, No. 1470, § 4; 2019, No. 315, § 869; 2019, No. 910, § 726.
A.C.R.C. Notes. Acts 2003, No. 1265 did not contain a section designated as Section 2.
Amendments. The 2019 amendment by No. 315 substituted “rules” for “regulations” in (c).
The 2019 amendment by No. 910, in (c), substituted “Division of Correction” for “Department of Correction” and “Division of Community Correction” for “Department of Community Correction”.
Research References
U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev.
Survey of Legislation, 2001 Arkansas General Assembly, Law Enforcement and Emergency Management, 24 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 501.
Case Notes
Constitutionality.
Supreme Court of Arkansas adopted the totality of the circumstances test and determined that the DNA collection statute did not constitute an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment; a convicted felon has a diminished expectation of privacy in the penal context, a blood test does not constitute an unduly extensive imposition on an individual's privacy and bodily integrity, and the state's interest in solving crimes is substantial. Polston v. State, 360 Ark. 317, 201 S.W.3d 406 (2005).
Illustrative Cases.
In a rape case, although defendant argued that a blood sample had been illegally taken from him when he was incarcerated in 1997 for non-payment of child support, which was not a qualifying offense named in the State Convicted Offenders DNA Database Act, § 12-12-1101 et seq., and it was based on that sample that the state obtained a “hit,” because defendant had submitted to another blood sample in 2000 when incarcerated for burglary, pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, the appellate court found that the state met its burden of proof in establishing that the DNA evidence was admissible, pursuant to the inevitable discovery doctrine. Haynes v. State, 354 Ark. 514, 127 S.W.3d 456 (2003), cert. denied, 541 U.S. 1047, 124 S. Ct. 2168, 158 L. Ed. 2d 740 (2004).
Based on the clear, unambiguous language of subdivision (a)(2)(A) of this section and § 12-12-1103(1), it was clear that the trial court did not illegally sentence defendant by requiring him to submit to a DNA sample after he received a suspended sentence because whatever conflict § 5-4-101 might have provided, if any, was resolved by the fact that its definitions were used only for Title 5, Chapter 4. Davis v. State, 94 Ark. App. 240, 228 S.W.3d 529 (2006).