~ITY OF Office of the JUNE LAGMAY CITY CLERK City Clerk Council and Public Services Room 395, City Hall HOLLY L. WOLCOTT Los Angeles, CA 90012 General Information~ (213} 978~1133 Executive Officer Fax: (213) 978-1040

www.cityclerk.lacity.org ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA MAYOR

August 5, 2010

To All Interested Parties:

The City Council adopted to RECEIVE AND FILE the action, as attached,

under Council file No. 10-1320 , at its meeting held August 3, 201 0 .

io

An Equal Employment Opportunity R Affirmative Action Employer /0-/3,:W SU!JGt:l & FINANCE ~0 ~ 2 320101 MOTION The recent apprehension of a suspect in the Grim Sleeper case has highlighted the effectiveness of using DNA evidence in police investigations. "Grim Sleeper" is the nickname for a in Los Angeles believed to be responsible for at least 11 murders since 1985. For many years, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) was unable to find evidence that linked an individual to these murders. However, this past month, LAPD was able to finally apprehend an individual through the use of familial DNA testing.

For many years, California law enforcement has been using DNA samples of convicted felons to assist in identifying suspects involved in violent crimes. In 2004, voters passed Proposition 69 (Prop 69) which required law enforcement officials to take samples from all adults arrested for felonies in the state.

Prop 69 has greatly assisted police in identifying criminals through the use of DNA matches. The Attorney General's Office reports that approximately 1,000 DNA samples from unsolved crimes have been matched to DNA samples taken during arrests, many of them of non­ violent crimes. A recent study conducted by the Attorney General's Office substantiates the effectiveness of taking DNA samples of all arrested individuals. In this study, the Attorney General's Office surveyed 69 DNA samples of individuals arrested for non-violent offenses. The study revealed that in 78 percent of cases, these individuals were linked to an unsolved violent crime such as murder and rape.

A lawsuit (Haskell v. Brown) has been brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) challenging Prop 69 and the State's collection of DNA from individuals arrested, but not convicted of crimes. A lower court judge earlier rejected the ACLU's legal challenge to Prop 69. On July 13, 2010, the Ninth Circuit heard arguments on this case.

The collection of DNA samples from felony arrestees for limited identification and investigation purposes far outweighs the minimal privacy concerns raised by the ACLU. The Grim Sleeper case is illustrative. Therefore, it is incumbent on the City to support the State by filing an amicus brief in the Haskell v. Brown case.

I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Attorney be requested to prepare and present an amicus brief in support of the State in the Haskell v. Brown case.

PRESENTED BY ~ t!. L- BERNARD C. PARKS AUG 0 3 201(}-Received and Filed er, 8th District

AD

3 2010 PLEASE SCHEDULE THE FOLLOWING ITEM FOR THE COUNCIL AGENDA FOR TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 2010 per Council District 8's request:

ITEM NO. ()

10-1320 CONSIDERATION OF MOTION (PARKS- ZINE) relative to requesting the City Attorney to prepare and present an amicus brief in support of the State of California in the case of Haskell v. Brown.

Recommendation for Council action:

REQUEST the City Attorney to PREPARE and PRESENT an amicus brief in support of the State of California in the case of Haskell v. Brown.

Community Impact Statement: None submitted.

(Budget and Finance Committee waived consideration of the above matter)

ARL 7/28/10 #101320_WAIVE