1 ... S ee Te x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OFAPPEA LS SE COND DIST RIC TOF TE XAS FORT WORTH NO . 2- 09- 158- CR L E S A R OCH E HOR T ON AP P E L L ANT V . TH E STA TE O F TEXA S STA TE

----- ----- -- FR O M CO UN TY CRI M I NA L CO URT NO . 4 OF DENTO N CO UN TY

----- ----- -- 

### MEMORANDU M OPI NI ON 1

----- ----- -- I . I nt roduc t i on A p p e lla n tL e s a R o c h e H o rt o n a p p e a ls h e r c o n v ic t io n fo r

d r i v in g w h ile i nt oxi cat ed ( D W I ) . I n tw o poi nt s, A ppel l ant contends t hat t he t r i al courter red by f ai l i ng t o s uppres s evi den ce of fi el d s obr i ety t es t s bec aus e t he t es t s di d not m ee tt he st and ard s eti n K el l y v. Sta te , 8 2 4 S. W . 2d 568 (Tex. Cr i m . A pp.2

200 2) , and t hatt he t r i al courti m perm i ss i bl y pl ac ed t he burden of proof t o s how th a t th e p o l i c e w ro n g fu l l y p e rfo rm e d th e te s ts o n A p p e l l a n t. W e w i l l a ffirm .

I I . Fa ct ual an d Proce dural Bac kground O n M arch 1 3, 20 08 , atapproxi m at el y 9: 00 p. m . , A m a nda C obb w as dr i vi ng hom e from w or k o n I - 35 w hen she saw the dri ver o f a van, w hi ch w as l at er i dent i fi ed asA ppe l l ant ’ s van , dr i vi ng e r rat i ca l l y, s w er vi ng, an d runni ng ot her dr i vers off t he road. C obb cal l ed 91 1 t o report t he er rat i c dr i ver . A ft er rel ayi ng a de sc r i pt i on of t he van t o t he 911 di sp at che r , Cobb, on t he adv i ce of t he 911 di sp at che r , t ur ned on he r ca r’ s em ergen cy fl as hers and be gan fol l ow i ng A ppel l ant ’ s van at a safe d i st ance. C obb st at ed t hatshe w as dr i vi ng betw een 85– 90 m . p.h. t o k ee p up w i t h Appel l ant ’ s van . Cobb fol l ow ed A ppe l l antfor t en to tw el ve m i l esunt i l a pol i ce of fi ce r arr i ved an d s t oppe d Appel l ant ’ s van . C o b b d i d n o t s to p to ta l k w i th p o l i c e th a t n i g h t. L a u ra N ic o le S t e p h e n s o n , a D e n t o n p o lic e o f fic e r , re c e iv e d a d is p a t c h c a ll of a rec kl es s dr i ver

i n a H onda O dys se y va n. W hen O f fi ce r St eph ens on s aw t he van , she not i ce d t hati tw asnotm ai nt ai ni ng a s i ngl e l ane of t raf fi c a nd t hatt he van w oul d speed up and t hen s l ow dow n. O f fi cer Stephenson t hen act i vat ed h e r p a tro l c a r’s o v e rh e a d l i g h ts a n d s to p p e d A p p e l l a n t’s v a n . W hen O f

fi ce r St eph ens on a pproac hed t he van , s he not i ce d t hatA ppe l l ant sm el l ed of

al coh ol , t hatshe had red and hea vy eye s, and t hatshe w asfum bl i ng2 ... A tt r i al , A ppe l l antt es t i fi ed t hats he st oppe d i n L ak e Dal l as , not

S o u th l a k e , a n d h a d d i n n e r w i th h e r s i s te r o n h e r w a y h o m e fro m w o rk . 3 w i t h he r bag . A ppe l l ant st at ed t hats he w asa ban ke r an d t hats he w asco m i ng hom e from w or k, b utl at er st at ed t hatshe w as on h er w ay hom e from di nner i n S outhl ake. Appel l antt ol d O f fi ce r S t eph ens on t hats he had t hree gl as se s of 2 w i n e w i th d i n n e r an d tha t i t t a k e s tw o to th ree d ri n k s fo r h e r t o fee l the effe c ts o f a lc o h o l. A p p e lla n t s t a t e d t h a t s h e w a s n o t o n a n y m e d ic a t io n , t h a ts h e d id n o t fe e l d ro w s y , a n d th a t s h e w a s n o t s i c k . O f fi ce r St eph ens on t hen ha d Appel l antge toutof he r va n t o pe rfor m t he s t a n d a rd i z e d fi e l d s o b r i e ty t e s t s . Du r i n g t h e Ho r i z o n t a l Ga z e Ny s t a g mu s ( HGN ) t es t , A ppe l l ant exh i bi t ed si x out of si x pos si bl e cl ues and w asnotab l e t o fol l ow di rec t i ons . D ur i ng t he w al k- and - t ur n t es t , A ppe l l ant exh i bi t ed fi ve outof ei ght pos si bl e c l ues . O f

fi ce r St eph ens on s t at ed t hattw o c l uesm ea ns t hata perso n i s i nt oxi ca t ed. Fi nal l y, dur i ng t he one- l eg- st and , A ppe l l antexhi bi t ed t hree out of four possi bl e cl ues. O f

fi cer S t ephen son st at ed t hattw o cl ues i ndi cat es t hat a p e rs o n i s i n to x i c a te d d u ri n g th i s te s t. A ft er ad m i ni st er i ng t he fi el d sobr i ety t ests, O f fi cer Stephenson t hen a rre ste d A p p e l l a n t. O ffi c e r S tep h e n so n as k e d A p p e l l a n t fo r a b l o o d o r bre a th t e s t , b u tA p p e lla n tre fu s e d b o t h t e s t s . A p p e lla n ta s k e d O f fic e r S t e p h e n s o n if sh e c oul d t ak e t he fi el d s obr i ety t es t s aga i n, butO f fi ce r St eph ens on refus ed.4

A ppe l l antw asch arged by i nfor m at i on w i t h t he of fens e of D W I . Appel l ant pl ea ded notgui l ty t o t he charge d offen se . A j ur y found A ppe l l antgui l ty a nd as se ss ed her

puni sh m entat150 daysi n j ai l , proba t ed for ei ght ee n m ont hs , an d a $700 fi ne. Thi s app ea l fol l ow ed. I I I . Di sc us si on I n tw o poi nt s, A ppe l l antco nt end s t hatt he t r i al courtabus ed i t s di sc ret i on by fai l i ng t o suppress evi dence of t he fi el d sobr i ety t estres ul t s because O f fi cer S t ephen son di d not adm i ni st er t he t est s i n accordance w i t h t he N at i onal H ig h w a y a n d T ra n s p o rt a t io n S a fe ty A d m in is t ra t io n (N H T S A ) m a n u a l. S pe ci fi ca l l y, A pp el l an t argu es t ha t be ca us e she w as fi fty po un ds o r m o re ove r w ei ght , t he t es t s sh ou l d notha ve bee n a dm i ni st ered. Addi t i ona l l y, A ppe l l ant as se rt s t hat t he t r i al cou rt w rongful l y pl ac ed t he burden of proof on her t o show th a t the pol i ce w rong ful l y perfor m ed t he t est s because she w as fi fty p o u n d s o r m o re o v e rw e i g h t. B e c a u s e b o th o f A p p e l l a n t’s p o i n ts c o n c e rn w het her

evi dence of t he fi el d sobr i ety t estres ul t s shou l d have been adm i t t ed und er t he Kel l y s ta n d a rd , w e w i l l a d d re s s b o th p o i n ts to g e th e r. A . Rul e 702 and K e l l y v . S tate R u le 7 0 2 o f t h e T e x a s R u le s o f E v id e n c e p ro v id e s a s fo ll o w s : “ If sci ent i fi c, t echni cal , or ot her speci al i zed know l edge w i l l assi stt he t r i er of fact t o und erst and t he evi dence or t o det er m i ne a facti n i ssue, a w i t ness qual i fi ed5

a s a n ex p e rtb y k n o w l e d g e , sk i l l , e x p e ri e n c e , tra i n i n g , o r ed u c a ti o n m a y tes ti fy t heret o i n t he for m of an opi ni on or ot her w i se. ” Tex . R . Evi d. 70 2. I ti s a t r i al c o u rt ’s re s p o n s ib ility u n d e r r u le 7 0 2 t o d e t e r m in e w h e t h e r p ro f fe re d s c ie n t ific ev i de nc e i s su f

fi ci en t l y rel i ab l e an d rel ev an tt o a ssi st t he j ury . Ja ck so n v. S tate , 17 S. W . 3d 664 , 6 70 (Tex. C r i m . A pp. 2000 ) . A t r i al co urt ’ s rul i ng on t he adm i ss i bi l i ty of

s ci ent i fi c e xpe rtt es t i m ony i s revi ew ed unde r an ab us e o f d i s c re ti o n s ta n d a rd . W e a th e rre d v . S tate , 1 5 S . W . 3 d 5 4 0 , 5 4 2 ( T e x . C r i m. A p p . 2 0 0 0 ). Th e propo nent of

t he sci ent i fi c evi dence m ustdem onst rat e t hroug h cl ear a n d c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e th a t th e e v i d e n c e i s i n fa c t re l i a b l e . Id . The propone nt of t he evi den ce m us ts at i sf y t hree cr i t er i a t o de m ons t rat e rel i abi l i ty: ( 1) t he u n d e r l y in g s c ie n t ific t h e o r y is v a lid ; ( 2 ) t h e t e c h n iq u e a p p ly in g t h e t h e o r y is val i d; an d ( 3) t he t ec hni que w asprope r l y a ppl i ed on t he occ as i on i n que st i on. K e lly , 82 4 S . W . 2d at57 3. O t her non excl usi ve fact ors t hat coul d af fecta t r i al cou rt ’ s det erm i nat i on of rel i abi l i ty i ncl ude ( 1) t he ext entt o w hi ch t he unde r l yi ng s c ie n t ific t h e o r

y a n d t e c h n iq u e a re a c c e p t e d a s v a lid b y t h e re le v a n ts c ie n t ific com m uni ty, i f

s uch a com m uni ty c an be as ce rt ai ned , ( 2) t he qua l i fi ca t i onsof t he exp ertt es t i f

yi ng, ( 3) t he exi st enc e o f l i t erat ure su pport i ng or rej ec t i ng t he unde r l yi ng sc i ent i fi c t heo r y and t ec hni que , ( 4) t he pot ent i al rat e of er ror of t he t ec hni qu e, ( 5) t he ava i l abi l i ty of ot her ex perts t o t es tan d e val uat e t he3 ... In h e r b ri e f, A p p e l l a n t d o e s n o t s ta te w h i c h fi e l d s o b ri e ty te s t re s u lt

evi dence t he t r i al courti m proper l y adm i t t ed. Therefore, w e w i l l address each o f th e th re e fi e l d s o b ri e ty te s ts . 6 t ec hni que , ( 6) t he cl ar i ty w i t h w hi ch t he unde r l yi ng s ci ent i fi c t heo r y a nd t ec hni que ca n be exp l ai ned t o t he cou rt , an d ( 7) t he exp er i enc e a nd s ki l l of t he p e rs o n w h o a p p l i e d th e te c h n i q u e o n th e o c c a s i o n i n q u e s ti o n . I d. B. H G N Test 3 Th e Texas C o u rto f Cri m i nal A ppeal s has hel d t hatt he H G N t esti s a s c i e n ti fi c te s t. E m e rso n v . S tate , 880 S . W . 2d 759, 764 (Tex. Cr i m . A pp. 1 9 9 4 ). T h e H G N te s t i s b a s e d o n s c i e n t if ic th e o ry , a n d th e re s u l ts a re adm i ssi bl e under

rul e 70 2 w hen t he t esti s proper l y adm i ni st ered by a qual i fi ed o ffice r. Id . a t 7 6 8 – 6 9 ; s e e T e x . R . E v i d . 7 0 2 ; O sb o u rn v . S tate , 92 S . W . 3d 5 3 1 , 5 3 7 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 2 ); K e lly , 824 S . W . 2d at573. Tes t i m ony co nc er ni ng t he H G N t es ti s sc i ent i fi c e vi den ce an d s ubj ec tt o t he cr i t er i a o f K e lly . See E m erso n, 880 S. W . 2d a t763. N y s t a g m u s is a n in v o lu n t a r y ra p id o s c illa t io n o f t h e e y e s in a h o r iz o n t a l, v e rti c a l , o r ro ta ry d i re c ti o n . Id . at 76 5. H or i zont al gaze nyst agm us re fers to t he i nabi l i ty of

t he eyes t o sm oothl y fol l ow an obj ectm ovi ng ho r i zont al l y across t he fi el d of vi si on, part i cul ar l y w hen t he obj ec ti s hel d a tan an gl e o f forty- fi ve d e g re e s o r m o re to th e s i d e . S e e W e b ste r v. S tate , 2 6 S .W .3 d 7 1 7 , 7 1 9 n .17

(Tex . A pp. — W aco 2 00 0, pet . ref’ d) . C onsum pt i on o f a l coho l exaggerat es n y s ta g m u s to th e d e g re e th a t i t c a n b e o b s e rv e d b y th e n a k e d e y e . Em erso n , 880 S. W . 2d at766. I n de t erm i ni ng w he t her a perso n' s perfor m anc e o f t he H G N t e s ts u g g e s t s in t o x ic a t io n , a n o f fic e r m u s t lo o k fo r t h e fo llo w in g c lu e s in ea ch eye : ( 1) t he l ac k o f s m oot h pursu i t , ( 2) di st i nctnys t agm us atm axi m um d e v i a ti o n , a n d (3 ) th e o n s e t o f n y s ta g m u s p ri o r to 4 5 d e g re e s . M c R a e v . S tate , 152 S. W . 3d 739, 743 (Tex. A pp. — H ous t on [ 1stD i st . ] 2004 , pe t . ref’ d) (op. on reh’ g) . The Em erso n cou rtal so det erm i ned t hatt he H G N t es t i ng t ec hni que i n th e N H T S A m a n u a l i s v a l i d . See Em erso n , 8 80 S. W . 2d at768– 69. The H G N t echni que i s appl i ed proper l y w hen t he offi cer fol l ow s t he stand ardi zed p ro c e d u re s o u tl i n e d i n th e D W I D e te c ti o n M a n u a l p u b l i s h e d b y N H T S A . See i d. A ppe l l ant ’ s com pl ai nton app ea l i s t hatt he t r i al courtab us ed i t s di sc ret i on b y a llo w in g t h e f ie ld s o b r ie ty t e s tre s u lt s t o b e a d m it t e d b e c a u s e t h e S t a t e d id n o t s h o w th a t th e y w e re p ro p e rl y a d m i n i s t e re d u n d e r K e lly . Spec i fi ca l l y, A ppe l l antco m pl ai ns t hatO f fi ce r St eph ens on di d notque st i on Appel l ant rega rdi ng he r

w ei ght . How eve r , ass t at ed abov e, t he H G N t es tfocu se s on t he m ove m entof

a perso n’ s ey es , rat her t han a perso n’ s abi l i ty t o ba l anc e o r c o o rd i n a te . S ee W ebst er , 26 S. W . 3d at 719 n. 1. A s su ch, A ppe l l ant ’ s w ei ght h a d n o e ffe c t o n th e o u tc o m e o f th e H G N te s t. Em erso n , 880 S. W . 2d a t766. A cc ordi ngl y, w e h ol d t hatt he t r i al cou rt di d not abu se i t s di sc ret i on by fai l i ng8

t o s uppres s t he H G N t es tev i den ce nor di d t he t r i al co urti m prope r l y pl ac e t he b u rde n o f pro o f on A p p e l l a n t as to th a t t e st. C . W a l k -an d -T u rn a n d O n e -Le g -S tan d T e sts U nl i ke t he H G N t es t , t he one - l eg- st and an d w al k- and - t ur n t es t s are not g ro u n d e d i n s c ie n c e . T e x a s c o u rts h a v e h e l d th a t, b e c a u s e a n o ffice r’s tes ti m o n y ab o u t a s u sp e c t’ s c o o rdina ti o n , b a l a n c e , a n d an y m e n tal ag i l i ty p ro b l e m s e x h i b i te d d u ri n g th e o n e -l e g -s ta n d a n d w a l k -a n d -tu rn te s ts a re obs er vat i onsgrounde d i n c om m on know l edg e, t he of fi ce r’ s t es t i m ony bas ed on t he s e obs e r

va t i on s i s c on s i de re d l a y w i t ne s s o pi ni on t e s t i m on y un de r rul e 701 a n d n o t e x p e rt te s ti m o n y u n d e r ru l e 7 0 2 . P l o u ff v . S tate , 192 S. W . 3d 213, 2 2 3 (T e x . A p p .— H o u s to n [1 4 th D i s t.] 2 0 0 6 , n o p e t.) (o p . o n re h ’g ); see Em erso n , 88 0 S. W . 2d at 76 3 (expl ai ni ng t hatpeace offi cer need not qual i f

y as e x p e rt to e x p re s s o p i n i o n a b o u t w h e th e r p e rs o n h e o b s e rv e d w a s i n to x i c a te d ). A n of fi ce r’ s t es t i m ony rega rdi ng a s us pec t ’ sp e rfor m anc e i n t he w al k- and tu rn a n d o n e -l e g -stan d tes ts c a n cro ss the l i n e fro m p e rm i ss i b l e l a y o p i n i o n to i m p e rm i s s i b l e e x p e rt o p i n i o n te s ti m o n y . S e e S m i th v . S tate , 65 S . W . 3d 332, 34 6 (Tex . A pp. — W aco 2 00 1, no pet . ) . H ow ever , Texas cou rt s have hel d t hat an offi cer

w ho uses t er m s such as “t est , ” “s t andardi zed cl ues ,” o r “di vi ded at t ent i on” w hen de sc r i bi ng t he w al k- and - t ur n a nd on e- l eg- st and t es t s i s not9

te s ti fy i n g a s a n e x p e rt. S e e P l o u ff, 1 9 2 S .W .3 d a t 2 2 4 ; M cR ae , 152 S. W . 3d a t 7 4 6 . A p p e l la n t a rgu e s th a t t h e tr i a l co u rtab u se d i ts d i sc reti o n b y fai l i n g to su ppres s t he fi el d s obr i ety t es tres ul t s bec aus e Offi ce r St eph ens on d i d not i nqui re i nt o Appel l ant ’ s w ei ght , an d t herefore, di d notprope r l y a dm i ni st er t he t es t s. Appel l antargue s t hatt he fai l ure t o a sk how m uch s he w ei ghe d a tt he t i m e o f t h e t e s t s s h o u l d re s u l ti n t h e e x c l u s i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e . Ad d i t i o n a l l y, A ppe l l antargue s t hatt he t r i al co urti m prope r l y pl ac ed t he burden of proof on her t o show thatshe w as fi fty pou nds or m ore over

w ei ght and, t herefore, t hat th e fi e l d s o b ri e ty te s ts w e re n o t p ro p e rl y a p p l i e d . I n h e r bri e f, A p p e l l a n t sta te s t h a t th e fi e l d so b ri e ty te sts are su bj e c t t o K e lly . H o w e v e r, a s s ta te d a b o v e , th e w a l k -a n d -tu rn a n d o n e -l e g -s ta n d te s ts a re no ts ci ent i fi c e vi den ce an d t herefore n ots ubj ec tt o Kel l y e xc e pt w he n an off i ce r ’ s t es t i m ony cros se s t he l i ne from l ay t es t i m ony t o e xpe rtt es t i m ony. S m i th , 65 S. W . 3d at34 6. H ere, A ppel l antdoes notassertt hatO f fi cer S t ephen son’ s t est i m ony w as i m per m i ssi bl e expertopi ni on t est i m ony, nor does sh e p oi ntt o t he rec ord a s evi den ce t hatO f fi ce r St eph ens on’ s t es t i m ony c ro s s e d th e l i n e to e x p e rt te s ti m o n y . R e g a rd l e s s , a fte r re v i e w i n g th e re c o rd , w e h o l d th a t O ffice r S te p h e n s o n ’s t est i m ony regardi ng t he w al k- and- t ur n and on e- l eg- st a nd t est s i s l ay w i t ness10

te s ti m o n y g o v e r n e d b y ru l e 7 0 1 . S e e P l o u ff, 19 2 S . W . 3d at22 4. O f fi cer St eph ens on s t at ed t hat , dur i ng t he w al k- and - t ur n t es t , sus pec t s are t o “ st and w i th the i r l e ft fo o t do w n an d the i r ri g h t fo o t, h e e l to to e , i n fro n t of th e l e ft one ” and t o “ pl ac e t hei r ha ndsatt hei r si de and t o hol d t hat pos i t i on w hi l e t he i ns t ruct i onsare b ei ng gi ven . ” She t est i fi ed t hatt here a re e i ghtcl uesfor t he w al k- and - t ur n t es t . O f fi ce r St eph ens on furt her st at ed t hat , w hen co nduc t i ng t h e t e s t s , s h e l o o k s t o “ m a k e s u re t h e y m a i n t a i n t h e i r b a l a n c e w h i l e l i st eni ng to th e i n s tru c ti o n s , th a t th e y d o n ’t s ta rt th e te s t b e fo re t h e in s t r u c ti o n s a re fi ni shed bei ng gi ven, [ and] t hatt hey t ouch t hei r s t eps heel t o t oe. ” O f fi cer S te p h e n s o n c o n ti n u e d th a t s h e i s “ l o o k i n g to s e e i f th e y s te p o ff th e l i n e , if t h e y s t o p w h ile w a lk in g t o s t e a d y t h e m s e lv e s , if t h e y ra is e t h e ir

h a n d s o v e r

s ix i nches for

bal ance, i f t hey t ur n i ncor rect l y, or i f t hey t ake an i ncor rectnum ber of s t eps . ” O f

fi ce r St eph ens on t es t i fi ed t hatA ppe l l antexhi bi t ed fi ve outof t he ei ghtcl uesdur i ng t he t es t . She furt her st at ed t hattw o c l uesm ea ns t hatt he s u bj e c t i s i n to x i c a te d . A ddi t i onal l y, O f

fi cer Stephenson st at ed t hatt he one-l e g - st and t esti s a

“ d iv id e d a t t e n t io n ” t e s t . S h e s t a t e d t h a ts h e h a s t h e s u bje c t“ s t a n d w it h [h is or he r] fee tt oge t her

and [ hi s or

he r] ha ndsatt hei r

s i de. ” O f

fi ce r St eph ens on sa i d t hats he hast he su bj ec thol d t ha tp os i t i on w hi l e s he gi vest hem t he i nst ruct i ons for

t he t est . She el aborat ed t hatt he i nst ruct i ons are “t o rai se11

ei t her t he r i ghtor

l eftfoo ta pproxi m at el y s i x i nch esof f t he ground, poi ntt he t oe t ow ards t he ground, l ook atyou r el eva t ed foot , an d co untal oud: O ne t hou san d one, one t hou sand tw o, one t hou sand t hree, one t hou sand four , so o n u n t il I t e ll [ t h e p e rs o n ] t o s t o p .” S h e s t a t e d t h a tt h e t e s tla s t s a p p ro x im a t e ly t hi rty s ec onds . O ffi ce r St eph ens on t es t i fi ed t hats he gav e Appel l antt he i ns t ruct i onsve r bal l y a nd a l so de m ons t rat ed how t he t es tw ast o be pe rfor m ed. O f fi ce r St eph ens on s t at ed t hatal t hough A ppel l antap pea red t o be a good c a n d i d a te fo r th e te s t, A p p e l l a n t to l d O ffice r S te p h e n s o n th a t“ h e r l e g s w e re fat . ”O f

fic e r S t e p h e n s o n t e s t ifie d t h a t A p p e lla n tra is e d h e r a r m s , s w a y e d w h ile bal anci ng, puther

footd ow n dur i ng t he t est , and w as unabl e t o coun tt he w ay O f fi ce r St eph ens on ha d i ns t ruct ed. O f fi ce r St eph ens on s t at ed t hatA ppe l l ant exh i bi t ed t hree outof t he four

pos si bl e c l uesfor

t he t es t . She st at ed t hatt he “d ec i si on poi nt ” on t hi s t es tw astw o c l ues , s o t he t es ti ndi ca t ed t hatA ppe l l ant w a s i n to x i c a te d . A fte r re v i e w i n g th e re c o rd , w e c a n n o t s a y th a t O ffice r S te p h e n s o n ’s te s ti m o n y c ro s s e d th e l i n e fro m l a y te s ti m o n y to e x p e rt te s ti m o n y . S e e P l o u ff, 1 9 2 S .W .3 d a t 2 2 4 ; M cR ae , 15 2 S . W . 3d at74 6. A ccordi ngl y, w e hol d t hat t h e t r ia l c o u rtd id n o ta b u s e it s d is c re t io n b y a llo w in g t h e a d m is s io n o f t h e fie ld s o b r ie ty t e s tre s u lt s a tt r ia l.12

A ddi t i onal l y, because w e hol d t hat O f fi cer S t ephen son’ s t est i m ony w as l ay w i t ness t est i m ony, and t herefore t he Kel l y s t a n d a rd d o e s n o ta p p ly , w e h o ld th a t t h e tr i a l c o u rtd i d n o t w ron g fu l l y p l a c e th e b u rde n o f pro o f on A p p e l l a n t t o s h o w h e r w e i g h t a t th e ti m e o f h e r a rre s t. S e e K e lly , 824 S. W . 2d a t573 (st at i ng t hatt he prop one ntof t he sc i ent i fi c e vi den ce m us ts how t hatt he te c h n i q u e w a s p ro p e rl y a p p l i e d o n th e o c c a s i o n i n q u e s ti o n ). D . H a r m A n a ly s is E v e n a s s u m i n g t h e t r ia l c o u rte rre d b y a d m it t in g t h e re s u lt s o f t h e fie ld so br i e ty t e s t s , w e c o n c l u d e t h a tAp p e l l a n tw a s n o th a r m e d b y t h e a d m i s s i on of t he evi dence. T h e e rro n e o u s a d m i s s i o n o f e v i d e n c e is n o n c o n s ti tu ti o n a l e rro r. See Ki ng v . S tate , 9 5 3 S .W .2 d 2 6 6 , 2 7 1 (T e x . C r im . A p p . 1 9 9 7 ). A s u b s t a n t ia l rig h tis a f fe c t e d w h e n t h e e r ro r h a d a s u b s t a n t ia l a n d inju r io u s e f fe c to r in flu e n c e in d e te rm i n i n g th e j u ry ’s v e rd i c t. I d. (ci t i ng K ot t eakos v . U ni t ed S t at es , 328 U. S. 7 5 0 , 7 7 6 , 6 6 S . C t. 1 2 3 9 , 1 2 5 3 (1 9 4 6 )); C o g g e sh a l l v . S tate , 961 S. W . 2d 63 9, 64 3 (Tex . A pp. — FortW ort h 1 99 8, pet . ref’ d) . C onvers el y, an er ror does notaf fec ta su bs t ant i al r i ghti f w e h ave “ fai r

as su ranc e t hatt he error di d not i nfl uence t he j ury, or had but a sl i ght ef

fect . ” S ol om on v. Sta te , 49 S. W . 3d 3 5 6 , 3 6 5 (T e x . C ri m . A p p . 2 0 0 1 ); J o h n so n v . S tate , 967 S. W . 2d 410, 417 (Tex . C r i m . A pp. 19 98 ) . I n m aki ng t hi s det er m i nat i on, w e revi ew t he record as13

a w h o l e , i n c l u d i n g a n y te s ti m o n y o r p h y s i c a l e v i d e n c e a d m i tte d fo r th e j u ry ’s con si derat i on, t he nat ure o f t he evi de nce s upport i ng t he verdi ct , an d t he c h a rac ter o f t h e all e g e d erro r an d h o w itm i g h t b e c o n side red i n co n n e c ti o n w i th o th e r e v i d e n c e i n th e c a s e . M o ti l l a v . S tate , 7 8 S . W . 3 d 3 5 2 , 3 5 5 ( T e x . C r i m. A p p . 2 0 0 2 ). H e re , C o b b te s ti fi e d th a t s h e w a s d ri v i n g h o m e w h e n s h e s a w A p p e l l a n t’s van s w er

vi ng a nd m ovi ng er rat i ca l l y. She st at ed t hatot her dr i vers w ere h avi ng t o run off

t he road t o avoi d bei ng hi tby A ppel l ant ’ s van. She st at ed t hataft er she cal l ed 9 11 , she cont i nued fol l ow i ng A ppel l a n tunt i l an offi cer pul l ed A p p e l l a n t’s v a n o v e r. O f fi cer Stephenson t esti fi e d thatshe recei ved a di spat ch of a reckl ess dr i ver dr i vi ng a H ond a O dyssey van. W hen she l ocat ed t he v a n, O f fi cer S t e p h e n s o n s t a t e d t h a ts h e n o t ic e d t h a tt h e v a n w a s n o tm a in t a in in g a s in g le l ane of t raf fi c an d t hatthe van w oul d speed up and t hen sl ow dow n. O f fi cer St eph ens on t hen t urne d on her ove r hea d l i ght s t o s t op Appel l ant ’ s van , but A ppe l l antm i ss ed t he exi tan d t hen s t oppe d on t he sh oul der of the hi ghw ay. O f fi ce r St eph ens on s t at ed t hatw h e n s h e a p p ro a c h e d A ppe l l ant ’ s van , A ppe l l ant sm el l ed of al coh ol , her eye s w ere red and hea vy, an d Appel l antw asfum bl i ng w i th h e r b a g . W h e n O ffice r S te p h e n s o n fi rs t q u e s ti o n e d A p p e l l a n t a b o u t w h e re sh e w asco m i ng from , A ppe l l ants t at ed t ha ts he w ason h er w ay hom e from14

w or k . How e ve r , Appe l l a nt l a t e r c ha ng e d he r s t or y a nd s t a t e d t ha tshe w as com i ng ho m e from d i nner . A ft er g et t i ng out of

t he van, A ppel l antst at ed t hat sh e h a d co n su m e d thre e g l a ss e s o f w ine w i th d i n n e r an d tha t i t t a k e s tw o to t hree dr i nks for

h er to feel the effect s of al coho l . A ppel l antst at ed t hatshe w as n o t o n a n y m e d i c a ti o n , n o r w a s s h e s i c k o r fe e l i n g d ro w s y . W e c onc l ude t hat , i n t he con t extof t he ent i re c as e a gai ns tA ppe l l ant , an y pos si bl e e r ror

i n a dm i t t i ng t he res ul t s of t he fi el d so br i ety t es t s w oul d notha ve had a su bs t ant i al or

i nj uri ousef

fec ton t he j ur

y’ s verdi ctan d w oul d notha ve a ffe c te d A p p e l l a n t’s s u b s ta n ti a l ri g h ts . See Ki ng , 95 3 S . W . 2d at27 1. Thu s, w e d i s re g a rd a n y a l l e g e d e rro r. S ee T e x . R . A p p . P . 4 4 .2 (b ). I V . Concl us i on H a v i n g o v e rru l e d A p p e l l a n t’s tw o p o i n ts , w e a ffirm th e tri a l c o u rt’s j u d g m e n t.

A N N E GA RD N ER J UST I CE PA N EL: G A R D N ER an d M C C O Y , J J. ; an d D I X O N W . H O LM A N (S eni or Just i ce, R e ti red , S i tti n g b y A ss i g n m e n t) DO NO T P UBLI SH Tex. R. A pp. P. 47. 2( b) DEL I VERE D: Aug us t31, 2010