Woodall v. State

OPINION

Opinion by

Justice MOSELEY.

David Woodall entered into a trial before a jury for driving while intoxicated, but after several witnesses had testified, he changed his plea to no contest. Woo-dall sets out two points of error, but we conclude that there is but one. In his appellate brief, the first point complains that the reliability of the Intoxilyzer 5000 should have been the subject of cross-examination; the second point contends that the denial of the right to cross-examine the State’s Intoxilyzer expert was error. After reviewing his arguments, we conclude that Woodall’s contention…