Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying a Frye hearing on whether firearms identification evidence is admissible when the weapon is not recovered. The court held that the trial court did not err in declining to conduct a Frye hearing because toolmark identification evidence without a weapon is not new or novel. The court cites to cases dating back to 1929 and 1937 admitting firearms identification evidence; and cites to Florida and other state cases that admit firearms identification evidence without the weapon dating back to 1969.