A not-guilty plea from a capital-murder defendant does not sufficiently raise the issue of identity to justify post-conviction testing for the presence of a third party's DNA. Also, a defendant does not have the same right to present evidence of a third-party's guilt in a post-conviction DNA proceeding as he does at trial. Although a defendant is entitled to present evidence of third-party guilt at trial, that entitlement does not carry over into CCP Chapter 64 proceedings dealing with post-conviction DNA testing. A defendant has no constitutional right to post-conviction DNA testing to determine the presence of a third-party's DNA. Prible v. State, AP-75,519. [1]