The California Supreme Court has agreed to review the legality of the state’s law requiring the collection of DNA samples from anyone arrested for a felony, even if they are never charged or convicted.

In their weekly closed-door conference, the justices on Wednesday accepted the state’s appeal of a ruling last December finding that the 2004 law is unconstitutional. A three-justice panel of the San Francisco-based 1st District Court of Appeal found the DNA collection violates the California constitution’s sweeping privacy protections.

By deciding to review the case, the state Supreme Court has wiped the appeals court ruling off the books, allowing law enforcement officials to resume collecting the samples from arrested felony suspects. The U.S. Supreme Court last year upheld a narrower Maryland law, but the California challenge rests on arguments that this state’s law is distinct and goes too far.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also has been considering a legal challenge to the California law.

Civil liberties groups argue that the California law lacks restraints, such as requiring prosecutors to file formal charges before DNA samples are collected or waiting until a judge can consider whether DNA collection is warranted. Unlike Maryland’s law, California also does not automatically expunge DNA profiles from its state database if a person is not convicted.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris appealed the 1st District ruling to the state Supreme Court, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year supports the legality of California’s law.

Howard Mintz covers legal affairs. Contact him at 408-286-0236 or follow him at Twitter.com/hmintz