From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bethune v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Apr 22, 1992
828 S.W.2d 14 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 1177-91.

April 22, 1992.

Appeal from 232nd Judicial District Court, Harris County, A.D. Azios, J.

Moses "Moe" Sanchez, Tommy Sanchez, Willis Robert Sanchez, Houston, Juan Martinez Gonzales, Beeville, for appellant.

John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty., and Winston E. Cochran, Jr., Russell Hardin, Lyn McClellan, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.


OPINION ON APPELLANT'S AND STATE'S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault, with punishment being assessed by a jury at a $10,000 fine and confinement in the penitentiary for life. This conviction was affirmed. Bethune v. State, 821 S.W.2d 222 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th] 1991). We granted discretionary review to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's decision to admit evidence pertaining to Appellant's DNA "fingerprint."

After having reviewed the record in this case, and in light of our recent decision in Kelly v. State, 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Cr.App. 1992), in which we held that DNA evidence is admissible when relevant, we now find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals in this case is affirmed.


Summaries of

Bethune v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Apr 22, 1992
828 S.W.2d 14 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)
Case details for

Bethune v. State

Case Details

Full title:Henry Lee BETHUNE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Apr 22, 1992

Citations

828 S.W.2d 14 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Bonds

Thus, we note in passing that the majority of the courts have admitted DNA testimony and evidence as being…