Benjamin Claude Comperry v. State, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 5401

Appellant Comperry pleaded guilty to misdemeanor DWI after suppression motion denied.
Officer Boles used TCIC/NCIC to check criminal history for prior DWI convictions to justify blood draw under §724.012(b)(3)(B).
TCIC indicated two prior DWI convictions (Harris and Galveston), though one entry described obstructing a highway as a second conviction.
Trial court found Boles credible and that TCIC was a normally reliable source; concluded two prior DWIs supported warrantless blood draw.
Comperry testified the Galveston result was only obstructing and not a second DWI; court found Boles reasonably relied on information from TCIC.
Appellate court held the trial court did not abuse discretion; TCIC information, though facially irregular, was reliable from a credible source and supports blood draw.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether reliable information from a credible source supports §724.012(b)(3)	Comperry argues TCIC data were facially irregular and not reliable.	State argues TCIC is normally reliable and credible; information need not be perfect.	Yes; information from a credible source is reliable even if imperfect.

Beeman v. State, 86 S.W.3d 613 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002) (implied-consent framework; police can obtain blood without a warrant in limited circumstances)
Badgett v. State, 42 S.W.3d 136 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (statutory interpretation; overlap of terms in 724.012(b)(3))
Clinton v. State, 354 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (statutory construction; presumption of entire statute’s effectiveness)
Gates v. Illinois, 462 U.S. 213 (1983) (totality-of-the-circumstances approach for probable cause)
Mata v. State, 46 S.W.3d 902 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001) (timing considerations in blood-alcohol evidence collection)
Cain v. State, 958 S.W.2d 404 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997) (credibility of intoxicated suspect vs. officer reliance on TCIC)