In People v. Barba (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 712, the trial court admitted into evidence four DNA reports and the testimony of an expert based on the reports. The testifying expert did not prepare any of the reports. The Court of Appeal determined that the evidence did not implicate the confrontation clause because the reports lack the requisite formality and the primary purpose of the report was not to accuse a targeted individual. The court observed: "As for the practical considerations that motivated the plurality in Williams v. Illinois (2012), we agree that it makes no sense to exclude evidence of DNA reports if the technicians who conducted the tests do not testify. So long as a qualified expert who is subject to cross examination conveys an independent opinion about the test results, then evidence about the DNA tests themselves is admissible." (Id. at p. 742.)