§ 9543.1. Thus, under Section 9543.1(a): The statute sets forth several threshold requirements to obtain DNA testing: (1) the evidence specified must be available for testing on the date of the motion; (2) if the evidence was discovered prior to the applicant’s conviction, it was not already DNA tested because (a) technology for testing did not exist at the time of the applicant’s trial; (b) the applicant’s counsel did not request testing in a case that went to verdict before January 1, 1995; or (c) counsel sought funds from the court to pay for the testing because his client was indigent, and the court refused the request despite the . client’s indigency. B. Williams, supra at 49 (citing 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 9543.1(a)(2)). See also Commonwealth v. Perry, 959 A.2d 932 (Pa.Super.2008) (<HOLDING>). Additionally: The text of the statute set
holding pcra counsel was not ineffective for declining to pursue postconviction dna testing where technology for testing existed at time of trial verdict came after january 1 1995 and court had not refused request for funds for testing consequently appellant could not have met his threshold burden under section 95431a2 holding that there is no postconviction due process right to biological evidence for purposes of dna testing holding that no  1983 claim exists for injunctive relief to compel dna testing holding that trial delay for dna testing was attributable to the state but was mere negligence holding that a claim seeking dna testing is cognizable under section 1983