NEWARK - The New Jersey law that mandates DNA testing for felons is constitutional and can be used to solve crimes committed before the sample was taken, the state Supreme Court ruled last month. A pair of 6-0 decisions, issued in two similar cases, upheld the New Jersey DNA Database and Databank Act of 1994, which had been affirmed by lower courts. Similar laws are in place federally and in all other states. One case was brought by John O’Hagen, who pleaded guilty to a drug charge in 2002 and objected to the collection of his DNA. He asserted it violated federal and state constitutional rights against unreasonable search without a warrant and equal protection. In rejecting his argument, Justice John E. Wallace Jr. wrote for the court, ``Because of the impracticality of imposing a warrant requirement and individualized suspicion in this context, the overriding public need for the uses of DNA data, the lessened expectation of privacy of a convicted felon, and the minimal nature of the physical intrusion, we find no violation of defendant’s constitutional rights.’’ The other case was brought by Jamaal W. Allah, who pleaded guilty to drug charges in 2001, and a juvenile, identified as ``A.A.,’’ who pleaded guilty to the adult equivalent of aggravated assault in 2002. They asserted that it was improper to use DNA as evidence of crimes committed before the DNA was taken, as well as the unreasonable search and equal protection grounds. The court again rejected the arguments, with Wallace writing, ``There is no constitutional bar to using a photograph or a fingerprint in helping to solve a crime, regardless of when the crime was committed, and we find insufficient reason to treat DNA test results in a different manner.’’ The rulings were decried by the American Civil Liberties Union, who had lawyers representing Allah and A.A. ``By ruling that we have no greater privacy interest in our DNA than we do in our fingerprints, the court has set the legal framework that could allow the government to require and obtain all New Jerseyans’ DNA samples upon birth,’’ said Deborah Jacobs, executive director for the ACLU of New Jersey. ``In light of New Jersey’s history of respect for privacy rights, it’s hard to believe that our state would allow a law that requires a teenager or preteen to have his DNA extracted, catalogued, and maintained by the government for the rest of his life because of a minor act of delinquency,’’ Jacobs said. O’Hagen was represented by the state Public Defender’s Office, where spokesman Tom Rosenthal said they were disappointed. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court was unlikely, he said, given that the law has been upheld around the nation. Jacobs said no decision had been made regarding an appeal in the other case. The state law, in addition to establishing a state DNA database, requires that DNA information to be forwarded to the FBI for its database, which is available nationally to law enforcement.