Washington ( CNN ) -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday allowed a controversial state DNA testing law to remain in effect until the justices have time to consider the broader constitutional questions . Maryland 's DNA Collection Act permits police to collect genetic material from those who have been arrested , but not yet convicted . Chief Justice John Roberts issued the three-page in-chambers opinion , putting a state court 's ruling favoring a criminal defendant on hold . `` Collecting DNA from individuals arrested for violent felonies provides a valuable tool for investigating unsolved crimes and thereby helping to remove violent offenders from the general population , '' Roberts wrote . `` Crimes for which DNA evidence is implicated tend to be serious , and serious crimes cause serious injuries . That Maryland may not employ a duly enacted statute to help prevent these injuries constitutes irreparable harm . '' The chief justice said there is a `` fair prospect '' the Supreme Court would ultimately find in favor of the state on the search and seizure questions . After more legal briefs are filed , the high court in coming weeks will decide whether to hear the case and issue a definitive , binding ruling . Oral arguments would likely not be held until early next year . A 1994 federal law created a national database in which local , state , and federal law enforcement agencies can compare and share information on DNA matches from convicted felons , but courts have been at odds on just when such samples can be collected and the information distributed . The current case involves a Maryland man convicted of a 2003 rape in Wicomico County in the state 's eastern shore region . Alonzo King Jr. had been arrested three years ago on an unrelated assault charge , and a biological sample was automatically obtained at that time . King moved to suppress the use of the DNA on Fourth Amendment grounds , but was ultimately convicted of the first-degree rape offense . A divided Maryland Court of Appeals later agreed with King , saying suspects under arrest enjoy a higher level of privacy than a convicted felon , outweighing the state 's law enforcement interests . That court also said obtaining King 's DNA immediately after arrest was not necessary in identifying him , and that the process was more personally invasive than standard fingerprinting . State officials then asked the justices to intervene now , saying the state court ruling `` has resulted in the loss of a valuable crime-fighting tool relied upon by Maryland . '' They said that from a law enforcement and forensic perspective , there is no difference between fingerprinting and collecting `` biometric information . '' Roberts in his opinion tentatively agreed . `` The ( state court ) decision below has direct effects beyond Maryland : Because the DNA samples Maryland collects may otherwise be eligible for the FBI 's national DNA database , the decision renders the database less effective for other states and the federal government , '' Roberts wrote . The state DNA collection law in Maryland is set to expire at the end of next year , but the justices are likely to decide its constitutionality before then . The case is Maryland v. King ( 12A48 ) .
Maryland 's law allows police to collect genetic material from those arrested . The DNA is then matched with a database of known criminals, and the results are sent back for further analysis. Chief Justice Roberts says there is a `` fair prospect '' the high court will uphold the law .