Justice for All Act: Victims’ Rights, DNA, and Wrongful Convictions

The Justice for All Act is a 2004 federal law that gave crime victims enforceable rights in federal criminal cases, funded a large expansion of DNA testing to clear rape kit and crime scene backlogs, and created new tools to identify and correct wrongful convictions. Signed by President George W. Bush on October 30, 2004 as Public Law 108-405, it bundled four separate bills into one statute and has been reauthorized twice since.¹

What the Law Contains

The Act is organized into four titles, each carrying the name of a separate piece of legislation folded into the whole:²

Title I, the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, which grants federal crime victims specific rights they can enforce in court.
Title II, the Debbie Smith Act of 2004, which created the main federal grant program for eliminating DNA testing backlogs.
Title III, the DNA Sexual Assault Justice Act of 2004, which funded lab standards, training, and forensic research.
Title IV, the Innocence Protection Act of 2004, which set up post-conviction DNA testing for federal prisoners and grants to help states do the same.

Each title addresses a different gap the drafters saw in the federal criminal justice system. The rest of this article walks through what each one actually does for the people it affects.

Rights the Act Gave Crime Victims

Before 2004, federal crime victims often had no formal role in the case against the person who harmed them. The Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 3771, changed that by writing a set of rights directly into federal law.³ Those rights include:

Reasonable protection from the accused.
Reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of public court proceedings, parole proceedings, and any release or escape.
The right not to be excluded from public proceedings, unless a court finds the victim’s testimony would be materially altered.
The right to be heard at proceedings involving release, plea, sentencing, or parole.
The right to confer with the prosecutor.
Full and timely restitution as provided by law.
Proceedings free from unreasonable delay.
The right to be treated with fairness and with respect for dignity and privacy.

Victims must also be told about plea bargains, deferred prosecution agreements, and their right to seek legal counsel.³

How Victims Can Enforce These Rights

What separated the CVRA from earlier victims’ rights language was the enforcement mechanism. A victim who believes a right has been denied can file a motion in district court. If the district court rules against them, they can petition the federal court of appeals for a writ of mandamus, and the appellate court has to rule within 72 hours.² The Act also directed the Attorney General to create an internal authority to investigate complaints against Department of Justice employees who fail to uphold victims’ rights and to impose discipline.⁴

The Ninth Circuit’s 2006 decision in Kenna v. U.S. District Court put teeth in the “right to be heard.” A district judge had let fraud victims speak at one defendant’s sentencing but refused to let them speak at his co-defendant’s sentencing three months later, saying it would not change the outcome. The Ninth Circuit granted mandamus, held that a written statement is not a substitute for speaking in person at sentencing, vacated the sentence, and ordered a new hearing.⁵

Limits of the CVRA

The Act has real limits worth knowing. It does not let victims sue the federal government for damages, and a failure to honor a victim’s right does not by itself entitle a defendant, or the victim, to a new trial. The CVRA also cannot be used to override the Attorney General’s prosecutorial discretion.⁶ It applies to federal cases; state prosecutions are governed by each state’s own victims’ rights law.

DNA Testing and Backlog Funding

Title II is named for Debbie Smith, a Virginia woman who was kidnapped from her home and raped in 1989 while her husband, a police officer, slept upstairs. Smith lived in fear for six and a half years before a CODIS DNA match identified her attacker, who was ultimately convicted of rape, abduction, robbery, burglary, and larceny and sentenced to two life terms plus 25 years. Smith then became a lead advocate for the legislation that carries her name.⁷

The Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program provides federal grants to state and local governments to test crime scene DNA evidence, work through testing backlogs, and expand forensic lab capacity. It prioritizes sexual assault kits, especially in cases with no identified suspect, and also funds audits of untested sexual assault evidence and prosecution office work on backlogged violent crime cases.⁸

The original law authorized $151 million per year from fiscal years 2005 through 2009.¹ As of July 2024, Public Law 118-72 continues that authorization at $151 million per year through fiscal year 2029. Funds are distributed by formula that accounts for samples awaiting analysis, population, and violent crime volume, with every state guaranteed at least 0.50 percent of appropriations. At least 75 percent of grant funds must go to DNA analysis and capacity-building, and administrative costs are capped at 3 percent.⁸

Who Goes Into CODIS

The Act also expanded the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System. CODIS had been largely limited to convicted offenders. The 2004 law added people charged by indictment or information and those whose DNA is collected under other legal authorities, while excluding people who were arrested but not charged and DNA submitted voluntarily for elimination. Profiles must be removed if a person is acquitted or the charges are dismissed. The Act also broadened qualifying federal offenses to include any felony, any sexual abuse offense, and any crime of violence, with parallel changes for military offenders under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.¹

What the Money Has Produced

Results have been mixed, because the volume of evidence has kept pace with testing capacity. Between 2011 and 2016, the Department of Justice awarded nearly $500 million in DNA backlog reduction grants. Labs completed more testing than before, yet the aggregate backlog of crime scene DNA analysis requests grew by 77 percent because submissions rose even faster.⁹ An earlier evaluation covering 2002 through 2005 found the median state casework backlog actually increased, even as CODIS hits linking evidence to suspects rose 100 percent and offender hits jumped 448 percent.¹⁰

Individual states have shown what testing produces. North Carolina reported that of more than 16,000 older sexual assault kits identified in local law enforcement custody, testing produced 954 CODIS hits and led to at least 66 arrests connected to 91 assaults.¹¹

Protections Against Wrongful Convictions

Title IV, the Innocence Protection Act, responded to the growing record of DNA-based exonerations. It works in two directions: it gives federal prisoners a way to seek DNA testing, and it funds states to do the same work.

Post-Conviction DNA Testing for Federal Prisoners

A federal inmate can petition for DNA testing of biological evidence in their case. The applicant must assert actual innocence under penalty of perjury. The evidence must not have been tested before, or a newer and more reliable method must be available, and the proposed testing must raise a reasonable probability that the applicant did not commit the offense. The applicant also has to provide a current DNA sample for comparison.¹²

If results are exculpatory, the applicant can move for a new trial or sentencing. If they are inculpatory, the court may treat the innocence claim as false and hold the applicant in contempt. The Act also barred the government from destroying biological evidence while a defendant remains imprisoned for the offense, subject to specific exceptions such as completion of testing.¹²

The Bloodsworth Grant Program

Named for Kirk Bloodsworth, the first American death-row inmate exonerated by DNA, this competitive grant program helps states pay for post-conviction DNA testing in violent felony cases where actual innocence might be shown.¹³ Originally authorized at $5 million per year through 2009, it was reauthorized in 2016 at $10 million per year through 2021.¹⁴

Through 2018, the National Institute of Justice documented 51 exonerations resulting from Bloodsworth-funded testing. The exonerated had served between 3 and 40 years. North Carolina led with 11, followed by California with 9 and Virginia with 7.¹³

Compensation and Capital Defense

Title IV raised federal compensation for people wrongfully convicted in federal cases to $50,000 per year of imprisonment, and $100,000 per year for time spent on death row. It also authorized $75 million a year for five years in grants to improve defense and prosecution in state capital cases, conditioned on states maintaining a roster of qualified attorneys and assigning at least two lawyers in capital cases.¹²

Forensic Science Infrastructure

Title III put money into the broader forensic system: helping crime labs comply with federal standards, training law enforcement and court officers to handle DNA evidence, and supporting sexual assault forensic exam programs.¹ It also created a National Forensic Science Commission, appointed by the Attorney General, to assess the field’s resource needs, identify useful scientific advances, and examine privacy protections for stored DNA samples. Congress authorized $500,000 a year for the Commission from 2005 through 2009.¹⁵

Reauthorizations and Current Status

The Justice for All Reauthorization Act of 2016 (Public Law 114-324) extended the grant programs, directed the National Institute of Justice to develop best practices for evidence retention, set aside specific funds for testing and auditing backlogged rape kits, and required Byrne Justice Assistance Grant applicants to submit a strategic plan for improving criminal justice administration.¹⁶ That reauthorization also doubled Bloodsworth funding from $5 million to $10 million a year.¹⁴

In July 2024, Public Law 118-72 extended the Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program at $151 million a year through fiscal year 2029.⁸ A separate Wrongful Conviction Review program, which funds organizations investigating innocence claims, still runs through annual appropriations rather than permanent statutory authorization; the Bureau of Justice Assistance awarded roughly $7.8 million under it in fiscal year 2024 for review entities, conviction integrity unit partnerships, and training.¹⁷

The law’s influence has spread past the federal system. The Innocence Project has said the Innocence Protection Act served as a model for state legislatures, and the financial incentives it created helped push all 50 states to enact their own post-conviction DNA preservation and testing statutes.¹⁸

1
GovInfo. Justice for All Act of 2004, Public Law 108-405
2
Office for Victims of Crime. Justice for All Act Fact Sheet
3
Cornell Law Institute. 18 U.S. Code § 3771 – Crime Victims’ Rights
4
U.S. Sentencing Commission. Primer on Crime Victims’ Rights
5
vLex. Kenna v. U.S. Dist. Court for C.D. Cal.
6
U.S. Sentencing Commission. Primer on Crime Victims’ Rights
7
Office for Victims of Crime. Debbie Smith Special Courage Award
8
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 34 USC 40701 – Debbie Smith DNA Backlog Grant Program
9
Government Accountability Office. DNA Evidence: DOJ Could Improve Oversight of Backlog Reduction Program
10
National Institute of Justice. Evaluation of the Impact of the Forensic Casework DNA Backlog Reduction Program
11
North Carolina Department of Justice. Attorney General Josh Stein Provides Sexual Assault Kit Testing Update
12
Death Penalty Information Center. DPIC Summary of the Innocence Protection Act of 2004
13
National Institute of Justice. Exonerations Resulting From NIJ Postconviction DNA Testing Funding
14
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 34 U.S.C. § 40727 – Kirk Bloodsworth Post-Conviction DNA Testing Grant Program
15
GovInfo. Justice for All Act Compilation
16
Federal Funds Information for States. Justice for All Reauthorization Becomes Law
17
Bureau of Justice Assistance. FY2024 Upholding the Rule of Law and Preventing Wrongful Convictions
18
University of Wisconsin Law Library. Innocence Project and Federal Legislation