From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trillo v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 21, 2004
No. 633-03 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 21, 2004)

Opinion

No. 633-03

Delivered: April 21, 2004. DO NOT PUBLISH.

Appeal from the Fourth Court of Appeals Bexar County. On State's Petition for Discretionary Review.


OPINION


Appellant was convicted of driving while intoxicated, and his punishment was assessed at two years community supervision and a $900 fine. The Court of Appeals reversed. Trillo v. State, No. 04-02-358-CR (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2003). The Court of Appeals relied on its previous opinion in Stewart v. State, 103 S.W.3d 483 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2003), and held that the trial court erred by admitting intoxilyzer results in the absence of retrograde extrapolation evidence. The State filed a petition for discretionary review. This Court recently reversed Stewart and held that intoxilyzer results are relevant without retrograde extrapolation evidence, and the "no evidence" standard of review is not the proper test for analyzing admissibility of evidence. Stewart v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___ (No. 0324-03, Tex.Crim. App., delivered March 3, 2004). At the time the Court of Appeals handed down its opinion, it did not have the benefit of our opinion in Stewart. Accordingly, we grant the State's petition for discretionary review, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand to that court for reconsideration in light of our opinion inStewart.


Summaries of

Trillo v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Apr 21, 2004
No. 633-03 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 21, 2004)
Case details for

Trillo v. State

Case Details

Full title:DAVID JAVIER TRILLO v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Apr 21, 2004

Citations

No. 633-03 (Tex. Crim. App. Apr. 21, 2004)

Citing Cases

Trillo v. State

After reversing this court's opinion in Stewart, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals vacated our judgment in…