John Brandon Burks v. State
05-14-01369-CR
Tex. App.Jun 1, 2015Background
- On Dec. 28, 2010, Jaime Stanley was struck by a pickup; she and her newborn suffered serious injuries. Burks later admitted he drove the vehicle and civil claims were settled. Criminal prosecution followed; Burks pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 8 years after a punishment hearing.
- At punishment, the State sought to admit State’s Exhibit 20: an Intoxilyzer 5000 printout reflecting Burks’s breath-test results from Jan. 20, 2011.
- The State offered the printout through Lori Fuller, a technical supervisor at the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences (SWIFS), who maintained Intoxilyzer records and trained officers but did not operate the machine for this test.
- The printout was signed only by Officer Johnson (the actual operator). Officer Johnson testified at trial, but the State did not offer the document through his testimony.
- Burks objected that the exhibit was not properly authenticated and not self‑authenticating under Rule 902(4); the trial court overruled and admitted the exhibit. Burks appealed, arguing the admission was an abuse of discretion and warrants a new punishment hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether State’s Exhibit 20 was properly authenticated | Burks: Exhibit lacked proper predicate; not authenticated by witness with personal knowledge and not certified as a public record | State: Fuller’s testimony about custody/maintenance of records and business‑records practice sufficed; exhibit is a business record/self‑authenticating | Trial court admitted exhibit; appellate brief argues this was error and an abuse of discretion because exhibit was neither authenticated through the operator nor certified as a public record |
Key Cases Cited
- Druery v. State, 225 S.W.3d 491 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (standard of review for admission of evidence is abuse of discretion)
- Tienda v. State, 358 S.W.3d 633 (Tex. Crim. App. 2012) (authentication may be by witness with personal knowledge or circumstantial evidence; Rule 901 basics)
- Blankenbeker v. Texas Dep’t of Pub. Safety, 990 S.W.2d 813 (Tex. App.—Austin 1999) (intoxilyzer printouts are self‑authenticating only if properly certified as public records under Rule 902(4) or offered through a sponsoring public‑entity witness)