My bad, I guess I phrased it wrong.
The recent Defense motion is to exclude any reference to the words "touch DNA" or "transfer DNA" when discussing the DNA on the knife sheath. In this motion they're not arguing against the use of the sheath DNA itself, just to the term "touch" or "transfer" to qualify it.
I find this really odd since IMO this is something I would expect from the State, not the Defense, and I really wonder how the Defense think it would benefit them. IMO qualifying the DNA as "only" touch was something that would be advantageous to the Defense, as it opened the door for many ways BK's DNA could have ended up in the sample, as has been discussed in these threads a thousand times.
So for them to now want to exclude that terminology is very weird to me.