evidence. [I]t is doubtful that jurors could take the probabilities ... combine them, and arrive at an answer with any degree of certainty as to its correctness. Furnishing statistical analysis would assist the trier of fact in such a case and that is the heart of admissibility under Rule 702. Without statistical evidence, the ultimate results of DNA testing would become a matter of speculation. Id. at 33. The court still recognized the jury’s prerogative to disregard the testimony, rejecting the argument that statistical conclusions remove the issue of guilt from jury deliberation. Id. Likewise, Wyoming and Michigan courts have held statistical conclusions are proper to provide the jury with a complete understanding of DNA evidence. See Springfield v. State, 860 P.2d 435 (Wyo.1933) (<HOLDING>); People v. Adams, 195 Mich.App. 267, 279, 489
holding that product rule method of dna statistical evidence is now generally accepted in the relevant scientific community holding a dna match is virtually meaningless without a statistical probability expressing the frequency with which it could occur holding reasonable probability is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome holding that there was no ineffective assistance for failing to hire a dna expert because the defenses theory was that the defendants dna was planted so the dna evidence would not seem to be an issue holding that admission of evidence that defendants dna profile was consistent with dna profiles from mixed blood samples was plain error warranting reversal because no testimony was provided to explain the statistical significance of a potential match