State v. Rodriguez

Summary

The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions, concluding that his unpreserved confrontation claim could not be reviewed because the record did not establish who performed the relevant DNA retesting. It also rejected his due process challenge to the DNA evidence because the evidence explained both the match and its statistical rarity, and the defense had opportunities to test or supplement that evidence. The court further held that the DNA evidence, combined with the defendant’s inconsistent statements and other circumstantial evidence, was sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.