Mohammad Jon Khairandish v. State ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                   IN THE
    TENTH COURT OF APPEALS
    No. 10-15-00343-CR
    MOHAMMAD JON KHAIRANDISH,
    Appellant
    v.
    THE STATE OF TEXAS,
    Appellee
    From the County Court at Law No. 1
    Brazos County, Texas
    Trial Court No. 14-03694-CRM-CCL1
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    Mohammad Jon Khairandish was convicted of driving while intoxicated and
    sentenced to 60 days in jail with a $1,000 fine. See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.04 (West
    2011). Because the trial court did not err in overruling Khairandish’s chain of custody
    objection, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
    When arrested for driving while intoxicated, Khairandish refused to give a breath
    or blood specimen. A warrant was issued, and Khairandish’s blood was drawn. In his
    sole issue on appeal, Khairandish complains that the trial court improperly admitted the
    blood draw kit evidence when the chain of custody was not properly established.
    Specifically, Khairandish contends the State did not establish a chain of custody of the
    kit, which contained a tube of Khairandish’s blood, because the officer who deposited the
    kit in the evidence drop box did not verify his identifying mark on the kit and did not
    testify that he retrieved the kit prior to trial; the evidence technician did not testify as to
    when he drove the kit to DPS for testing; and there was no testimony as to when the DPS
    lab received the kit.
    Absent evidence of tampering, issues regarding the chain of custody bear on the
    weight, rather than on the admissibility, of evidence. Davis v. State, 
    313 S.W.3d 317
    , 348
    (Tex. Crim. App. 2010); Lagrone v. State, 
    942 S.W.2d 602
    , 617 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). There
    was no evidence and no suggestion of tampering with this evidence. Thus, chain of
    custody had no bearing on the admissibility of the kit, and Khairandish’s objection to the
    kit’s chain of custody was properly overruled.
    Khairandish’s sole issue is overruled, and the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
    TOM GRAY
    Chief Justice
    Before Chief Justice Gray,
    Justice Davis, and
    Justice Scoggins
    Affirmed
    Opinion delivered and filed July 20, 2016
    Do not publish
    [CR25]
    Khairandish v. State                                                                     Page 2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-15-00343-CR

Filed Date: 7/20/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/26/2016