From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burks v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Jan 28, 2016
No. 05-14-01369-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 28, 2016)

Opinion

No. 05-14-01369-CR

01-28-2016

JOHN BRANDON BURKS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee


On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5 Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F13-21294-L

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Francis, Evans, and Stoddart
Opinion by Justice Evans

John Brandon Burks pleaded guilty to the offense of failure to stop and render aid in an accident involving serious bodily injury that occurred on December 28, 2010. There was no recommendation from the State as to punishment. At the punishment hearing, the State introduced its Exhibit 20 which purported to be a report from an alcohol breath-test administered to appellant on January 20, 2011 when he was arrested for driving while intoxicated and possession of marijuana. Appellant objected to the admission of the exhibit on the basis of "improper predicate." The trial court overruled appellant's objection.

On appeal, appellant's sole issue challenges the trial court's admission of State's Exhibit 20 on the ground that it was not properly authenticated. Appellant's objection at trial was that the State did not provide a proper predicate to admission of the document. To preserve error, an appellant must make an objection in the trial court with sufficient specificity to make the trial court aware of his complaint. See TEX. R. APP. P. 33.1; Peyronel v. State, 465 S.W.3d 650, 654 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015). An "improper predicate" objection is not sufficiently specific to preserve error with respect to authentication. See Zimmerman v. State, 860 S.W.2d 89, 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993), vacated on other grounds, 510 U.S. 938 (1993). Furthermore, appellant presents no argument showing how he was harmed by the document's admission. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.2; Carter v. State, 145 S.W.3d 702, 710 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2004, pet. ref'd). We resolve appellant's sole issue against him.

We affirm the trial court's judgment.

/David W. Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE Do Not publish
TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2
141369F.U05

JUDGMENT

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 5, Dallas County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. F13-21294-L.
Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. Justices Francis and Stoddart participating.

Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED. Judgment entered this 28th day of January, 2016.


Summaries of

Burks v. State

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
Jan 28, 2016
No. 05-14-01369-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 28, 2016)
Case details for

Burks v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOHN BRANDON BURKS, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Court:Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

Date published: Jan 28, 2016

Citations

No. 05-14-01369-CR (Tex. App. Jan. 28, 2016)