Moseley v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
1DissentWhitham, Justice
I respectfully dissent. My disagreement with the majority concerns validation of the intoxilyzer test result. I concur in the majority’s holding that “[ejven if the trial court improperly allowed Scott to testify as to the test result, this error would not be reversible because the result of the test was already established by Velasquez’s unchallenged testimony.” Therefore, both the majority and this dissent agree that a test result indicating a 0.22 blood alcohol content was in evidence through Velasquez’s testimony. In my view, however, the test result cannot be evidence of intoxication…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Almanza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
- McMahon v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
- Rangel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973