In his affidavit attached to his motion to retest the previously tested samples, Mireles did not allege there is a reasonable likelihood that results of testing previously tested items would prove more probative than the results of the previous tests. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 64.01 (a-1); see also Manns v. State, No. 02-19-00312-CR, 2020 WL 1466314, at *8 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth Mar. 26, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication)

And Lumsden provided no affidavit and no third-party evidence showing that TrueAllele testing is more accurate and probative than the results of the previous testing on the vaginal swabs; thus, his motion contains merely conclusory statements, which are insufficient.See Manns v. State, No. 02-19-00312-CR, 2020 WL 1466314, at *8 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth Mar. 26, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication); Keller, 2019 WL 1561817, at *5. Moreover, although the article from The Atlantic does not state when TrueAllele's development was complete, it states that Perlin and his wife focused on developing it in 1996, and the article was published in June 2016, which was prior to Lumsden's September 2016 convictions.

However, when a defendant raises a self-defense claim, the identity of the alleged perpetrator is ipso facto not an issue. See Pegues v. State, 518 S.W.3d 529, 535 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2017, no pet.); Peyravi v. State, 440 S.W.3d 248, 249-50 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013, no pet.); Lyon v. State, 274 S.W.3d 767, 769 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2008, pet. ref'd); Reger v. State, 222 S.W.3d 510, 514 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2007, pet. ref'd); see also Manns v. State, No. 02-19-00312-CR, 2020 WL 1466314, at *7 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Mar. 26, 2020, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication). In Lyon, the appellant asserted that "DNA testing [would] prove he acted in self-defense when he stabbed" his former wife.