Courts across the country have found DNA typing methodologies and statistical probabilities testimony to meet the Frye, Daubert, and modified standards; United States v. Beverly, 369 F.3d 516; 2004 FED App. 0136P (6th Cir.); 64 Fed. R. Evid. Serv.  Callaghan) 357 (6th Cir. 2004) (mitochondrial methodology accepted); Edward J. Imwinkelried & D.H. Kaye, DNA Typing: Emerging or Neglected Issues, 76 Wash. L. Rev. 413 (April 2001)]. Some states have enacted statutes regulating the admissibility of DNA evidence. Where such statutes exist, prosecutors should refer to their applicable statutes.

Back Forward