But to a federal judge, the mandate is a boost to public safety and a benefit to convicts by encouraging them to go straight, as well as a reasonable search.

"The state of Utah has a substantial interest in protecting its citizens from dangerous criminals by accurately identifying both victims and perpetrators of future and past crimes," U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell said in an order dismissing a civil rights suit by Suniville.

Suniville filed a lawsuit in 2002 challenging the state's DNA collection statute, which requires all persons added to Utah's sex offender registry, or convicted of a felony or a Class A misdemeanor, to provide genetic material for an identification database. The law, which was passed in 2002 by the state Legislature, also requires the offender to pay $75 for the cost of obtaining the DNA specimen.

The convict, 53, who represented himself, alleged the law was unfairly applied to him because it was enacted after his conviction. He initially refused to comply with a demand for his DNA, but relented after officials threatened to take a sample by force, according to his suit.

Suniville was convicted in 1986 of second-degree felony robbery and served a total of about 15 years, after being released on parole and returned a few times. He walked out of prison last Sept. 28.

"The State has cast too wide a net, seemingly presupposing crimes to investigate and prosecute even before they have been committed, (what's next? conviction for our thoughts?) and which suggests discriminatory civil rights 'profiling,' and unequal under the law treatment, as opposed to simply investigating and prosecuting crimes after they have actually happened," he said in his suit.

Cassell, however, said the DNA act merely creates a database for solving crimes without targeting a particular person, a type of reasonable "suspicionless search."

"And there is nothing to suggest that the State will use the DNA database for any purpose besides identifying the source of DNA left at a crime scene," the judge said in his order, handed down Thursday.

He also pointed out that most cases involve only a swapping of the subject's mouth, making it a fairly unobtrusive search, and upheld the charging of the $75 fee.

In addition, Cassell said Suniville was "simply mistaken" in claiming he received no benefit in return for his payment.

"One of the primary purposes for the DNA identification database is to deter persons convicted of crimes with a high recidivism rate from re-offending," the judge wrote.

"Thus, the database serves as a tool for rehabilitating persons like [Suniville], who have committed certain crimes."

pmanson@sltrib.com

---

Tribune reporter Justin Hill contributed to this report.