Has anyone introduced DNA results in a case through a certificate of analysis under Art. 38.41?

I haven't found any cases on Westlaw in which it was done, but a reading of the statute doesn't seem to prohibit it.

I would never, ever not put the analyst on the stand in a case in which DNA was important, but it seems like it might not be such a bad idea to go the certificate route if you had a case in which the DNA was kind of tangential - it'd be an easy way to show the jury that the lab did everything without belaboring the point.