for New York testified in support of admission of the evidence. Curiously, the witness from the New York Medical Examiner supporting the admission of the polymarker evidence was Dr. Shaler, the same expert who testified against admission of polymarker evidence in the present case. The New York court concluded that “the People have met their burden in establishing that the PCR tests at issue here are sufficiently established to gain general acceptance in the scientific community and satisfy the standard of reliability.” Ibid. Since defendant’s trial in the present case, at least six other courts have held that polymarker testing is scientifically reliable. United States v. Beasley, 102 F.3d 1440, 1448 (8th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — US. -, 117 S.Ct. 1856, 137 L.Ed.2d 1058 (1997) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Shea, 957 F.Supp. 331, 338
holding under the restrictive frye test that pcrstr testing is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community holding that expert opinion based on scientific technique is inadmissible unless technique is generally accepted as reliable in relevant scientific community holding pcrdq alpha test and gmkm blood tests sufficiently reliable to be admitted at trial holding that dq alpha and polymarker testing are sufficiently reliable under daubert and have achieved general acceptance within relevant scientific community holding that the frye test of general acceptance in the scientific community was superceded by the federal rules