Others may chime in but in finding of facts the trial court is considered locked in. Appeals are usually won on procedural, legal angles and other issues. It it rare that an appeal will set aside the fact finding of the trial court as I remember.
I just felt like the jury got fixated on the DNA evidence with no knowledge of the science behind it. They locked on to the DNA evidence as clear guilt but nobody questioned how much was detected and how common DNA transfer is among people living in close proximity.
I guarantee that every one of us here has fecal bacteria on our toothbrushes and I’d like to think that at least 90% of us don’t scratch out butts with our toothbrushes.
There was a case in Detroit a year or so back where a guy chased down a burglar and shot him. The jury convicted him and the judge ended up setting the verdict aside based on the fact that the circumstances surrounding the shooting were withheld by the prosecution. Turns out that the guy had been robbed 3 times in a week while he was at work. On day 4 he came home early, caught them and killed the slow one. The judge basically equated it with a Sheppard guarding his flock.