A proposal to collect DNA samples from people arrested for felonies won't gain passage in this year's legislative session, but Congressman Neil Abercrombie and Honolulu Prosecutor Peter Carlisle still want state lawmakers to consider expanding Hawai'i's DNA collection practices in the future.

However, at an informational briefing before the House Judiciary committee Friday, the American Civil Liberties Union opposed a change to the current law, which allows for DNA testing only after a conviction.

Abercrombie, a former probation officer, said being able to collect DNA evidence before a trial has the potential to provide evidence in an otherwise "cold" case, or it could exonerate those who might have been wrongfully arrested or convicted.

For instance, Abercrombie said, authorities could solve a rape case with DNA evidence obtained if the attacker happens to be arrested for an unrelated incident.

"You don't think you want DNA taken as a matter of course from people who are arrested?" he asked.

Eleven states have enacted laws that require DNA submissions upon arrest.

According to the authors of House Bill 2773, since Virginia enacted such a law, such evidence has helped that state identify suspects in 383 cold cases.

Abercrombie pointed out that participating in a national database could allow people who are arrested in one state to be identified for crimes in another state. He also said there is $147 million available to states in the federal Debbie Smith backlog grant program, which seeks to wipe out a backlog of unanalyzed DNA samples across the country.

Hawai'i Attorney General Mark Bennett said the proposal is an important one, but first the Honolulu Police Department needs help dealing with backlog in collecting DNA samples from felons who are already convicted.

Before expanding the law, legislators should focus on "making sure HPD gets the resources it needs to meet the mandate it already has," Bennett said.

ACLU senior staff attorney Dan Gluck said one state, Minnesota, has had a DNA law overturned as unconstitutional.

"The government is actually seeking to develop this massive database with the sensitive medical information of innocent individuals," Gluck said.

He pointed to cases in which DNA samples have been mislabeled or tampered with and innocent people have ended up serving time in jail. He also noted that the DNA sample would remain in the database even if the person was found innocent.

Gluck said the current law — which takes DNA samples only from people proved guilty — is adequate. "What we are opposed to is having a violation of constitutional rights for individuals or those who are innocent," he said.

Carlisle said a DNA database could allow local law enforcement to identify suspects who otherwise might not be connected to the crime and close cold cases in which the person who committed the crime is still free.

"The bigger the database the better," he said.

Reach Treena Shapiro at tshapiro@honoluluadvertiser.com.