DNA evidence and new trials

The (Nashville) Tennessean: Genetic testing is now a routine part of criminal investigations. Yet many offenders who were convicted before DNA became such a factor of certainty in criminal justice are now in prison.
One such offender is Paul Gregory House, who was convicted in the 1985 murder of Caroline Muncey in Luttrell, Tenn. DNA testing wasn't available when House went to trial.
Crucial link lost
More than a decade after House was convicted and sentenced to death, DNA tests indicated that the semen on Mrs. Muncey's nightgown and underwear came from the victim's husband, not from House. Since the prosecutors convinced the jury that House raped, then killed Mrs. Muncey, the semen evidence was crucial to the motive ascribed to him.
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court made exactly the right decision in the House case. In a 5-3 decision, the court said that House can use the DNA evidence to attempt to prove his innocence.
The only way the specifics of this case can be examined is by allowing House to present them in court. As long as this nation grapples with pre-DNA convictions, it must allow offenders a reasonable opportunity to get new DNA evidence before a judge and jury.