R.I. Gen. Laws
Rhode Island General Laws

R.I. Gen. Laws § 11-37-17 (2026)

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) — Mandatory testing

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section RI-LEGwebserver.rilegislature.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any person who has admitted to or been convicted of or adjudicated wayward or delinquent by reason of having committed any sexual offense involving sexual penetration, as defined in § 11-37-1, whether or not sentence or fine is imposed or probation granted, shall be ordered by the court upon the petition of the victim, immediate family members of the victim or legal guardian of the victim, to submit to a blood test for the presence of a sexually transmitted disease including, but not limited to, the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) which causes Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) as provided for in chapter 23-6.3.

(b) Notwithstanding the limitations imposed by §§ 23-6.3-7 and 5-37.3-4, the results of the HIV test shall be reported to the court, which shall then disclose the results to any victim of the sexual offense who requests disclosure. Review and disclosure of blood test results by the courts shall be closed and confidential, and any transaction records relating to them shall also be closed and confidential.

(c) [Deleted by P.L. 2009, ch. 196, § 3, and by P.L. 2009, ch. 289, § 3].

(d) [Deleted by P.L. 2009, ch. 196, § 3, and by P.L. 2009, ch. 289, § 3].

(e) [Deleted by P.L. 2009, ch. 196, § 3, and by P.L. 2009, ch. 289, § 3].

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1977–2004 · leading case: State v. Dearmas, 841 A.2d 659 (R.I. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Dearmas, 841 A.2d 659 (R.I. 2004). · cites it 2× “See G.L. 1956 § 11-37-17 (requiring convicted sexual offenders to submit to blood test to allow state to test for presence of sexually transmitted diseases); G.”
In re Fiske, 367 A.2d 1069 (R.I. 1977). “1956, §11-37-17, a nonexistent statute. Because we reverse on other grounds, we ignore this defect.”
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.