N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Executive / ARTICLE Commission On Forensic Science and Establishment of Dna Identification Index
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Executive Law § 995 (2026)

Definitions

✓ text as retrieved May 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 995. Definitions. When used in this article, the following words and
terms shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section:
  1. For purposes of general forensic analysis the term "forensic
laboratory" shall mean any laboratory operated by the state or unit of
local government that performs forensic testing on evidence in a
criminal investigation or proceeding or for purposes of identification.
  2. For purposes of forensic DNA analysis, the term "forensic DNA
laboratory" shall mean any forensic laboratory operated by the state or
unit of local government, that performs forensic DNA testing on crime
scenes or materials derived from the human body for use as evidence in a
criminal proceeding or for purposes of identification and the term
"forensic DNA testing" shall mean any test that employs techniques to
examine deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) derived from the human body for the
purpose of providing information to resolve issues of identification.
Regulation pursuant to this article shall not include DNA testing on
materials derived from the human body pursuant to title five of article
five of the public health law for the purpose of determining a person's
genetic disease or medical condition and shall not include a laboratory
operated by the federal government.
  3. "DNA testing methodology" means methods and procedures used to
extract and analyze DNA material, as well as the methods, procedures,
assumptions, and studies used to draw statistical inferences from the
test results.
  4. "Blind external proficiency testing" means a test sample that is
presented to a forensic laboratory for forensic DNA testing through a
second agency, and which appears to the analysts to involve routine
evidence submitted for forensic DNA testing.
  5. "DNA" means deoxyribonucleic acid.
  6. "State DNA identification index" means the DNA identification
record system for New York state established pursuant to this article.
  7. "Designated offender" means a person convicted of any felony
defined in any chapter of the laws of the state or any misdemeanor
defined in the penal law except: (a) a person convicted of prostitution
under section 230.00 of the penal law, or (b) a person whose
participation in the offense is determined by a court to have been a
result of having been a victim of sex trafficking under section 230.34
of the penal law, sex trafficking of a child under section 230.34-a of
the penal law, or trafficking in persons under the trafficking victims
protection act (United States Code, Title 22, Chapter 78).
  8. "DNA record" means DNA identification information prepared by a
forensic DNA laboratory and stored in the state DNA identification index
for purposes of establishing identification in connection with law
enforcement investigations or supporting statistical interpretation of
the results of DNA analysis. A DNA record is the objective form of the
results of a DNA analysis sample.
  9. "DNA subcommittee" shall mean the subcommittee on forensic DNA
laboratories and forensic DNA testing established pursuant to
subdivision thirteen of section nine hundred ninety-five-b of this
article.
  10. "Commission" shall mean the commission on forensic science
established pursuant to section nine hundred ninety-five-a of this
article.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 55 cases (11 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Nicholas v. Goord, 430 F.3d 652 (2d Cir. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nicholas v. Goord, 430 F.3d 652 (2d Cir. 2005). · cites it 6× “N.Y. Exec. Law § 995 et seq. (McKinney 1999).”
Kellogg v. Travis, 188 Misc. 2d 164 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2001). · cites it 6× “This is an action for a declaratory judgment to declare Executive Law § 995 (7), as amended, unconstitutional as applied to plaintiff and others similarly situated, and to order that defendant Katherine N.”
People v. Garvin, 812 N.E.2d 773 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. 2004). “§ 29 — 16—6 (2002); N.Y. Exec. Law § 995 — c (McKinney 2002); N.”
People v. McCullen, 63 A.D.3d 1708 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2009). · cites it 2× “We agree with defendant that the instant crimes were committed before the effective dates of the amendments to Executive Law § 995, which made the crimes “designated offenses” for purposes of imposition of the DNA databank fee of $50 (see Executive Law § 995 [7]; Penal Law § 60.”
People v. Murray, 54 Misc. 3d 825 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2016). · cites it 2× “Enacted as article 49-B of the Executive Law, the legislation starts with the creation of the New York State Commission on Forensic Science, a representative body whose mission is to promulgate rules for “any laboratory operated by the state or unit of local government”…”
People v. Cooper, 88 A.D.3d 1009 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011). · cites it 2× “Here, the defendant was convicted of promoting prison contraband in the first degree, a “designated offense” as defined by Executive Law § 995 (7). Therefore, the County Court properly imposed a $50 DNA databank fee on the defendant at the time of sentencing.”
People v. Watkins, 77 A.D.3d 1403 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2010). “35 [1] [a] [i], [v]; Executive Law § 995). Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals has made clear that such fees are not “components of a defendant’s sentence” (People v Hoti, 12 NY3d 742, 743 [2009]), and we thus conclude that the court’s imposition of the correct amount of fees at…”
Stajic v. City of New York, 214 F. Supp. 3d 230 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). “” N.Y. Exec. Law § 995 -a(2)(b). Plaintiffs appointment on the Commission was renewed in 2007, 2010, and 2013.”
Washpon v. New York State Dist. Attorney, 164 Misc. 2d 991 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1995). · cites it 3× “It defines "forensic laboratory” (Executive Law § 995 [1]) and "forensic DNA laboratory” (Executive Law § 995 [2]) — for the purposes of the article (Executive Law § 995), i.”
Landry v. Attorney Gen., 709 N.E.2d 1085 (Mass. 1999). “tained in its DNA identification database to be released to law enforcement agencies or district attorneys’ offices for “law enforcement identification purposes,” to assist in the recovery or identification of human remains and missing persons (provided there is an agreement…”
United States v. Terrance Matthews, 205 F.3d 544 (2d Cir. 2000). “18 (i) (McKinney 1993) (requiring that information filed with the state ethics commission be “expunged in its entirety” when state official under scrutiny resigns); N.Y. Exec. Law § 995— c.9 (McKinney 1996) (requiring that DNA records be “expunged from the state DNA…”
United States v. Morgan, 53 F. Supp. 3d 732 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). “N.Y. Executive Law § 995 -b (McKinney 2013).”
Show all 55 citing cases →
N.Y. Executive Law § 995(6): 1 case
People v. Chiclana, 2025 NY Slip Op 50654(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Erie Cty. 2025).
N.Y. Executive Law § 995(7): 1 case
Roland v. City of New York, No. 1:19-cv-02240 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2023).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.