Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                                             KEN PAXTON
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    March 21, 2018
    Jeffrey Barnard, M.D.                                     Opinion No. KP-0188
    Chair
    Texas Forensic Science Commission                         Re: Whether postmortem toxicological
    1700 North Congress Avenue, Suite 445                     analysis conducted pursuant to the request of
    Austin, Texas 78701                                       a medical examiner or forensic pathologist is
    subject to accreditation requirements of the
    Forensic Science Commission (RQ-0183-KP)
    Dear Dr. Barnard:
    You ask about the accreditation authority of the Texas Forensic Science Commission (the
    "Commission") concerning postmortem toxicological analysis conducted pursuant to the request
    of a medical examiner or forensic pathologist. 1 The Commission administers forensic science
    accreditation and licensing programs under article 38.01 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. TEX.
    CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 38.01, § 4-d. You state that "[t]oxicology is the science of identifying and
    understanding the adverse effects of external chemical and physical agents on biological systems."
    Request Letter at 2; see MERRIAM-WEBSTER'S COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY 1323 (11th ed. 2004)
    (defining "toxicology" as "a science that deals with poisons and their effect and with the problems
    involved"). You explain that medical examiners and forensic pathologists typically request
    postmortem toxicology to determine an individual's cause and manner of death. Request Letter at
    2-3. You ask generally "whether postmortem toxicological analysis ... conducted pursuant to the
    request of a medical examiner or forensic pathologist is subject to Commission accreditation
    requirements." 
    Id. at 1:
    Article 38.01 creates the Commission and assigns its duties and authority. TEX. CODE
    CRIM. PROC. art. 38.01. The statute does not require accreditation of particular types of analysis
    or testing such as postmortem toxicology. Rather, article 38.01, section 4-a requires the
    Commission to license certain persons as forensic analysts. 
    Id. art. 38.01,
    § 4-a. Also, section 4-d
    requires the Commission to accredit "crime laboratories and other,entities conducting forensic
    analyses of physical evidence for use in criminal proceedings." 
    Id. art. 38.01,
    § 4-d(b)(l). As you
    ask only about accreditation, we limit our review to the Commission's authority to accredit entities
    under article 38.01.
    1
    See Letter from Jeffrey Barnard, M.D., Chair, Tex. Forensic Sci. Comm'n, to Honorable Ken Paxton, Tex.
    Att'y Gen. at 1, 3 (Sept. 22, 2017), https://www.texasattomeygeneral.gov/opinion/requests-for-opinions-rqs
    ("Request Letter").
    Jeffrey Barnard, M.D. - Page 2                       (KP-0188)
    The Co;mmission's accreditation authority under article 38.01 depends on the meaning of
    several key terms that article 38.01 defines by reference to article 38.35. See Entergy Gulf States,
    Inc. v. Summers, 
    282 S.W.3d 433
    , 478 (Tex. 2009) (holding that "[i]f a statute defines a term, a
    court is bound to construe that term by its statutory definition only" (internal quotation marks
    omitted)). As defined, a "'crime laboratory' includes a public or private laboratory or other entity
    that conducts a forensic analysis subject to [article 38.35]." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.
    38.35(a)(l) (emphasis added); see also 
    id. art. 38.01,
    § 2(3) (stating that the term "'[c]rime
    laboratory' has the meaning assigned by Article 38.35"). For accreditation purposes,
    "Forensic analysis" means a medical, chemical, toxicologic,
    ballistic, or other expert examination or test performed on physical
    evidence, including DNA evidence,for the purpose of determining
    the connection of the evidence to a criminal action. The term
    includes an examination or test requested by a law enforcement
    agency, prosecutor, criminal suspect or defendant, or court. The
    term does not include:
    (F) an expert examination or test conducted principally for
    the purpose of scientific research, medical practice, civil or
    administrative litigation, or other purpose unrelated to
    determining the connection of physical evidence to a
    criminal action.
    
    Id. art. 38.35(a)(4)(F)
    (emphases added); see also 
    id. art. 38.01,
    § 4-d(a) (adopting the definition
    of"forensic analysis" from article 38.35). 2 Additionally, article 38.35 defines "physical evidence"
    as "any tangible object, thing, or substance relating to a criminal action," and "criminal action" as
    "includ[ing] an investigation, complaint, arrest, bail, bond, trial, appeal, punishment, or other
    matter related to conduct proscribed by a criminal offense." 
    Id. art. 38.35(a)(2),
    (5).
    You ask whether postmortem toxicology conducted pursuant to the request of a medical
    examiner or forensic pathologist falls within the "medical practice" exception from the definition
    of"forensic analysis" in article 38.35(a)(4)(F). Request Letter at 3. You ask further if the answer
    depends on whether the postmortem toxicology results are used for the purpose of determining the
    connection of evidence to a criminal action. 
    Id. Neither article
    38.01 nor article 38.35 addresses
    whether the laboratory of a medical examiner or forensic pathologist must be accredited. See TEX.
    CODE CRIM. PROC. arts. 38.01, .35. However, a laboratory of a medical examiner or forensic
    pathologist can be a "crime laboratory" subject to the Commission's accreditation requirements if
    it performs a "forensic analysis subject to" article 38.35. 
    Id. art. 38.35(a)(l).
    Toxicologic
    examinations or testing performed on physical evidence are subject to article 38.35 if they are
    performed "for the purpose of determining the connection of the evidence to a criminal action."
    2
    Article 38.01, section 2 also provides a definition of "forensic analysis." TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art.
    38.01, § 2(4). However, sections 4-a and 4-d specifically adopt the definition located in article 38.35 for licensing
    and credentialing purposes. 
    Id. art. 38.01,
    §§ 4-a(a)(I), 4-d(a).
    Jeffrey Barnard, M.D. - Page 3                       (KP-0188)
    
    Id. art. 38.35(a)(4).
    The exclusion for examinations or tests conducted principally for medical
    practice purposes is limited to purposes "unrelated to determining the connection of physical
    evidence to a criminal action." 
    Id. art. 38.35(a)(
    4)(F). Harmonizing the definition of forensic
    analysis with its exceptions, a court would likely conclude that testing constituting medical
    practice is excluded only if its principal purpose is "unrelated to determining the connection of
    physical evidence to a criminal action." 
    Id. Thus, a
    laboratory performing postmortem toxicology
    analysis is a crime laboratory subject to accreditation requirements if, and only if, the purpose of
    the analysis is to determine the connection of the evidence to a criminal action. 
    Id. Under article
    38.35, the purpose of the examination or testing, not how the results are
    ultimately used, determines whether the laboratory performing the postmortem toxicology analysis
    is subject to accreditation. 
    Id. Further, the
    purpose of the toxicology depends on why a medical
    examiner or forensic pathologist requests the analysis. Cf id art. 38.35(a)(4)(F) (stating that for
    forensic accreditation purposes, the term '"forensic analysis' ... includes an examination or test
    requested by" law enforcement, prosecutors, suspects, defendants, or a court). You acknowledge
    that "[p]ostmortem toxicology may but does not necessarily involve a criminal action," but you do
    not provide us with information about circumstances when a request for postmortem toxicology
    analysis is or is not related to a criminal action. Request Letter at 3. The facts and circumstances
    concerning a particular request by a medical examiner or forensic pathologist for postmortem
    toxicology testing and examination will likely determine whether the laboratory that performs the
    analysis is subject to accreditation requirements. 3
    Moreover, even if statutory definitions could encompass a particular type of analysis,
    article 38.01 authorizes the Commission to further refine by rule the scope and applicability of the
    accreditation process requirements to comport with certain practical considerations. See TEX.
    CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 38.01, § 4-d(b); see also 37 TEX. ADMIN. CODE§ 651.5 (Tex. Forensic Sci.
    Comm'n, Forensic Disciplines and Procedures Subject to Commission Accreditation).
    Specifically, the Commission may create exemptions from the accreditation process for an entity
    conducting a particular type of forensic analysis examination or test that is admissible under a
    statute or well-established rule of evidence, or if it is "routinely conducted outside of a crime
    laboratory by a person other than an employee of the crime laboratory." 
    Id. art. 38.01,
    § 4-d(c)(2)-
    (3). Nevertheless, the Commission's duty to establish an accreditation process for crime
    laboratories and other specified entities requires the Commission to determine in the first instance,
    subject to judicial review, whether particular postmortem toxicological analysis is performed for
    the purpose of determining the connection of physical evidence to a criminal action and therefore
    subject to accreditation requirements.
    3 As discussed above, whether a laboratory or division is subject to accreditation does not resolve whether
    individual forensic analysts are subject to licensing requirements.
    Jeffrey Barnard, M.D. - Page 4                (KP-0188)
    SUMMARY
    Postmortem toxicological analysis requested by a medical
    examiner or forensic pathologist is subject to the Forensic Science
    Commission's accreditation authority only if it is performed for the
    purpose of determining the connection of physical evidence to a
    criminal action. Such purpose depends on why a medical examiner
    or forensic pathologist requests the analysis, not how the results are
    ultimately used. Whether any particular postmortem toxicological
    analysis is performed for the purpose of determining the connection
    of physical evidence to a criminal action is for the Commission to
    · determine in the first instance, subject to judicial review.
    Very truly yours,
    KEN PAXTON
    Attorney General of Texas
    JEFFREY C. MATEER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    BRANTLEY STARR
    Deputy First Assistant Attorney General
    VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    WILLIAM A. HILL
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: KP-0188

Judges: Ken Paxton

Filed Date: 7/2/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 3/21/2018