Maine
Maine has no forensic science commission and no statute requiring crime lab accreditation, but Department of Health and Human Services rules require ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation for seized-drug testing and for OUI drug testing. In 2026 the Law Court vacated a murder conviction over forensic podiatry testimony. Since July 29, 2026, a statewide system must track every sexual assault kit, and all sexual assault kits must be kept 20 years. A 2021 law bars most government facial surveillance and makes unlawfully obtained data inadmissible.
- Sources checked
- Part of
- Forensic Ledger
At a glance
- Oversight body
- No forensic science commission. The Maine State Police Crime Laboratory is defined in the DNA Act (25 MRSA §1572(2)), and the Chief of the State Police runs the state DNA data base and data bank (§1573). No statute creating the lab itself was found. The Department of Health and Human Services certifies seized-drug and OUI analysts and approves breath-testing instruments by rule; its Health and Environmental Testing Laboratory tests the instruments (10-144 CMR chs. 266, 269, 270).
- Lab accreditation
- No statute requires crime lab accreditation, but DHHS rules do for two kinds of testing. A seized-drug analyst can be certified only if the work is done in a lab “accredited as a Forensic Testing Laboratory in accordance with” ISO 17025 that holds DEA registration (10-144 CMR ch. 266); that certification is what makes a drug-analysis certificate admissible (17-A MRSA §1112). Labs conducting OUI chemical tests for drugs other than alcohol “must be accredited as a Forensic Testing Laboratory to ISO 17025 standards” (10-144 CMR ch. 270). By statute, an OUI blood lab may qualify through DHHS certification, a state license plus federal CLIA certification, or, since 2024, ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation (29-A MRSA §2524(2)). The kit tracking law defines a crime laboratory as the State Police lab “or another accredited laboratory” (25 MRSA §2915-B(1)(A)).
- Analyst licensing
- No licensing statute; DHHS certifies analysts by rule. Drug-analysis certificates must be signed by a person DHHS has certified (17-A MRSA §1112). Seized-drug certificates expire one year after issue (ch. 266). OUI analyst certificates last no more than six months for blood alcohol and one year for toxicology, and are renewed by passing a discipline-specific proficiency test from a provider accredited to ISO 17043 (ch. 270). Breath tests may be given only by a person certified by the Maine Criminal Justice Academy (29-A MRSA §2524). By statute the DHHS approval stamp on a breath instrument lasts no more than one year; by rule a Health and Environmental Testing Laboratory chemist tests each instrument before approval, the label is valid “for no more than seven months,” and instruments are retested at least semi-annually (10-144 CMR ch. 269).
- Admissibility standard
- M.R. Evid. 702 (restyled 2014) admits expert testimony that “will help the trier of fact”; Maine “did not adopt the final subparagraphs of Federal Rule of Evidence 702” (Restyling Note). Courts require a “threshold level of reliability” (State v. Williams, 388 A.2d 500 (Me. 1978); Searles v. Fleetwood Homes of Pa., Inc., 2005 ME 94). In State v. Brackett, 2026 ME 9, the Law Court declined to decide whether to adopt Daubert and said its test requires “a similarly rigorous gatekeeping function.” Maine has not adopted the 2023 change to Federal Rule 702.
- Post-conviction forensic relief
- No. Maine’s postjudgment statute is DNA-only: a motion for DNA analysis and a new trial (15 MRSA §§2136-2138). One deadline runs two years from when new DNA technology “became commonly known and available” (§2137). No statute addresses new or changed forensic science generally.
- DNA database scope
- Conviction-based; no arrestee collection. Covered: people convicted on or after October 1, 2001 of murder, any Class A, B or C crime, or listed sexual offenses, including attempts; people convicted from January 1, 1996 to October 1, 2001 of offenses listed in §1574(4); people incarcerated before 1996 for those offenses, before release; and juveniles adjudicated since October 1, 2003 of listed serious offenses (25 MRSA §1574). The Chief of the State Police need not collect or analyze samples “unless adequate funding is available” (§1573(3)).
- Facial recognition
- Yes, a ban with exceptions (25 MRSA §6001, 2021). Public employees and officials may not obtain or use a facial surveillance system except to investigate a “serious crime” on probable cause, identify the dead, or find missing or endangered persons. Searches go through the Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the State Police, and search logs are public records in de-identified form. Facial surveillance data alone does not establish probable cause. Data obtained in violation must be deleted on discovery and is inadmissible; an aggrieved person may sue for injunctive or declaratory relief or mandamus, and violating employees face discipline.
Changes, 2023 to 2026
Statewide sexual assault kit tracking system; all sexual assault kits kept 20 years; kit inventory due
The Department of Public Safety “shall operate and maintain” a tracking system for every completed kit, reported or not. Crime labs, health care providers and police must log each step, from sending out an unused kit through analysis to return or destruction. Victims get anonymous, secure access to their kit’s status, and prosecutors also have access. Participants must join on the schedule set by department rules and are immune from civil liability for required acts. County-by-county reports start January 1, 2028 and must include average and median times to analysis and reported kits unanalyzed for more than a year. Police must keep sexual assault kits 20 years “regardless of whether the alleged offense” is reported. Every agency holding kits must inventory them by October 1, 2027. A budget initiative in Part A funds a Forensic Chemist II position, a DNA Forensic Analyst position and a contracted trainer for the system.
The act also ended a conflict. From October 25, 2023 to July 28, 2026, 25 MRSA §3821 said unreported kits were kept 20 years, while 24 MRSA §2986(3) said 8 years; PL 2025, c. 109, §3 re-enacted the 8-year text effective September 24, 2025. No rule deciding which provision controlled was found.
For practitioners: In a sexual assault case, ask for the kit’s tracking record. This entry does not confirm that the department’s rules are adopted or that the system is running.
Laws of Maine 2026 24 MRSA §2986 Laws of Maine 2025 (c. 109)
DNA records disclosed to a charged person under the criminal discovery rules
A person identified and charged through a DNA database search may receive that person’s own records “and any other records that person is entitled to under the Maine Rules of Unified Criminal Procedure.” The text previously referred to the Maine Rules of Evidence. The section now speaks of records that “may be disclosed” rather than persons who “may have access.”
For practitioners: Request DNA database records through criminal discovery.
Law Court vacates a murder conviction over forensic podiatry footprint testimony
The court vacated the conviction and remanded for a new trial. Admitting a podiatrist’s opinion matching a partial, bloody, sock-clad footprint to the defendant was error under Rule 702, an error “magnified by the State’s characterization of that testimony in its closing and rebuttal argument.” The court called the status of forensic podiatry footprint comparison “at a minimum, debatable”: no black-box studies exist, the expert did not use the method the field adopted after 2012, and his choices rested on no replicable standard. It cited the 2009 NAS and 2016 PCAST reports. It kept the Searles and Williams test, declined to decide whether to adopt Daubert, and left open whether review should be de novo.
For practitioners: Challenge feature-comparison evidence by asking for validation studies and a replicable method; Brackett applies Maine’s existing reliability test with close scrutiny.
Sale of self-administered sexual assault evidence kits banned
No one may sell or offer materials marketed so that someone other than a licensed hospital or health care practitioner can collect evidence of a sexual assault. A violation is presumed to violate the Unfair Trade Practices Act. The section “does not affect the admissibility in a court proceeding of evidence collected using” such a kit.
For practitioners: Evidence from a self-collected kit is not excluded by this law; its admissibility turns on the ordinary evidence rules.
Seized-drug analyst certification rule amended; current text requires an ISO 17025 lab
The current rule says: “No person may be certified unless that person’s work is completed in a laboratory accredited as a Forensic Testing Laboratory in accordance with” ISO 17025 and holding a DEA controlled substance registration. Certificates expire one year after issue and may be revoked for cause. The rule implements 17-A MRSA §1112, under which a drug-analysis certificate signed by a DHHS-certified person is admissible. The pre-2025 text was not compared, so which provisions the 2025 amendments added is not stated here.
For practitioners: Check the analyst’s DHHS certificate date and the lab’s ISO 17025 accreditation before accepting a drug certificate; under §1112 the defense may, by written notice within 10 days, require a qualified witness to testify.
Breath-alcohol instrument rule amended
Under the current rule, instruments must be approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation and tested by a chemist of the Health and Environmental Testing Laboratory before approval. The approval label is valid “for no more than seven months,” and each instrument is retested at least semi-annually. A complete test is two breath samples agreeing within ±0.02 g/210L; if they do not, more samples are taken, and the sequence is void if no two of four agree. The content of the 2024 changes was not compared.
For practitioners: Check the date on the instrument’s approval label against the seven-month limit in the rule.
OUI blood labs may qualify through ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation
A lab analyzing blood for alcohol or drugs must be DHHS-certified, or state-licensed and CLIA-certified, “or be accredited pursuant to standard ISO/IEC 17025 ... by a 3rd-party accrediting body.” The ISO clause is new. It matches DHHS rule 10-144 CMR ch. 270, which, as amended April 3, 2023, requires ISO 17025 accreditation for labs conducting OUI tests for drugs other than alcohol.
For practitioners: Ask which of the three routes the testing lab relied on, and for its accreditation scope.
Warrant rule for device content extended to all electronic devices and cloud storage
Warrant rules that covered “portable electronic device” content now cover any “electronic device.” A government entity may get content from a provider of electronic communication service or remote computing service, newly defined to include on-demand Internet storage offered to the public, only with a warrant or as the subchapter otherwise allows. The emergency exception remains.
For practitioners: Digital evidence from desktop computers or cloud accounts now needs the same warrant showing as phone content.
Sexual assault exam evidence may not be used against the survivor for minor offenses
Evidence gathered during a sexual assault forensic examination may not be used to prosecute the survivor for Class D or E drug crimes, criminal OUI, failure to appear, release violations, liquor offenses, engaging in prostitution or related juvenile crimes, to revoke the survivor’s conditional release, or as a basis to search for evidence of those offenses. The survivor may have a sexual assault counselor present during the exam and interviews.
For practitioners: The bar protects the survivor only; it does not exclude exam evidence against the accused.
Unreported sexual assault kits kept 20 years instead of 8; strangulation kits kept 6 years
Police must store kits involving sexual assault for 20 years, up from 8, and kits involving only strangulation for 6 years. Unreported strangulation kits are now also transported and stored by the nearest agency, identified only by tracking number. 24 MRSA §2986(3) still said 8 years until July 29, 2026 (see the 2026 entry).
For practitioners: For October 2023 to July 2026, a 20-year hold satisfies both statutes; ask whether any unreported kit was destroyed at 8 years in that period.
OUI sample collection and drug testing rule amended; current text requires ISO 17025 accreditation for drug-testing labs
The current rule, in its section on labs conducting chemical tests for drugs other than alcohol, says labs testing for substances of use “must be accredited as a Forensic Testing Laboratory to ISO 17025 standards by an accrediting body, such as” ANAB. Analysts must be DHHS-certified and work under an accredited lab. Certificates last no more than six months for blood alcohol and one year for toxicology, and renewal requires passing a discipline-specific proficiency test from a provider accredited to ISO 17043. Positive specimens are kept at least six months. The prior text was not compared, so which provisions the 2023 amendment added is not stated here.
For practitioners: In an OUI drug case, ask for the analyst’s certificate, the most recent proficiency result and the lab’s accreditation scope; ask early if the sample must be kept past six months.
Enacted, not yet in force, and bills that did not pass
- 2026 Me. Rules 04, M.R. Evid. 902(13)-(14): order dated October 8, 2026; effective November 1, 2026. A record “generated by an electronic process or system that produces an accurate result,” and data copied from a device or file and “authenticated by a process of digital identification,” become self-authenticating on a qualified person’s certification, with notice. The Advisory Note discusses hash values, says the rules track Federal Rules 902(13) and (14), and notes that challenging authenticity may require “retaining a forensic technical expert.” Hearsay, relevance and confrontation objections remain. 2026 Me. Rules 04
No bill on these topics is pending; the 132nd Legislature adjourned April 29, 2026. Bills that did not pass:
- LD 540 (2025-2026) would have required the Chief Medical Examiner to use forensic genetic genealogy testing to identify unidentified remains. It died on adjournment April 29, 2026. Its predecessor, LD 838 (2024), was held by the Governor and died (LD 540).
- Kit tracking bills LD 2129 (2024, held by the Governor), LD 549 and LD 1816 (2025-2026) died; the substance was enacted in PL 2025, c. 650, Part OOO.
- LD 2237 (2026), oral fluid testing for impaired drivers, died on adjournment. LD 1815 (2025), blood drug tests after serious or fatal crashes, died between houses on June 16, 2025 (LD 2237).
Checked and unchanged
- 25 MRSA §1574 (DNA scope): last amended in 2011. The only other 2023 to 2026 changes to the DNA Act are the 2026 amendment to §1577(2) (PL 2025, c. 659), listed above, and a wording revision in §1575(2) (PL 2025, c. 316).
- 15 MRSA §§2136-2138 (postjudgment DNA analysis): last amended in 2019 and 2015.
- 25 MRSA §6001 (facial surveillance): only a Revisor’s correction (RR 2025, c. 2).
- M.R. Evid. 702: unchanged since the 2014 restyling. Later Evidence amendments, including one effective August 1, 2018, Rule 804(b)(6) (effective October 14, 2025) and Rule 902 (effective November 1, 2026), did not change Rule 702.
- 17-A MRSA §1112 (drug-analysis certificates): no 2023 to 2026 amendment. PL 2025, c. 109 removed “alleged” before “victims” in the forensic examination statutes; apart from re-enacting the 8-year text in 24 MRSA §2986(3), noted above, it changed terms only.
- Budget items are funding, not law changes: 2023 crime lab equipment and a DNA analyst position, and a 2026 firearms examiner contract authorization (PL 2025, c. 650, Part PPP). No source says these are filled or operating.
Last updated October 20, 2026Source: United States Council for Law & InvestigationCite as: United States Council for Law & Investigation, “Maine forensic science oversight: Forensic Ledger,” uscli.org/forensic-science-tracker/maine (last updated October 20, 2026). Text licensed CC BY 4.0.