S.C. Supreme Court decides scope of state's DNA identification statute

In Cannon v. South Carolina Department of Probation, the Supreme Court considered whether the South Carolina Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) Identification Record Database Act required Cannon, as a condition of his parole, to submit a DNA sample to the state's database. The statute at issue provided that: "A person convicted . . . before July 1, 2000, who is serving a probated sentence or is paroled on or after July 1, 2000, for: [one or more enumerated crimes]." Cannon was paroled in 1983. He argued to the trial court that the word "paroled" refers to an individual who is "released to parole" on or after July 1, 2000, and that because he was released to parole prior to that day, the Act did not apply to him. The trial court found that such a construction of the word "paroled" would limit the statute's operation and would be destructive of its intent. The court found it was the intent of the legislature to include all individuals currently paroled in the database.

The Supreme Court reversed. The Court held that the plain wording of the statute indicates the word "paroled" refers to an individual who is "released to parole" on or after July 1, 2000.