Edward Nicholas, the defendant, in this case, was charged with the burglary and rape of a woman called Ms. S. It had been found through a vaginal smear that Ms. S was an O blood type, making the rapist a type O secretor or a non-secretor. Nicholas was a non-secretor with an A blood type. Nicholas could not be ruled out as a suspect because 60 % of the population is a type O secretor or non-secretor. Nicholas objected to these results; however, they were allowed into evidence by the trial court, and upon conviction, he appealed. The text (note 1) tells us that "evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact (of consequence) more or less probable than it would be without the evidence." The issue posed here would be whether evidence that tends to limit the field of possible perpetrators is relevant to identity. The answer is yes. This evidence could prove or disprove the identity of the defendant. For this reason, Nicholas's conviction and sentence were affirmed upon appeal