Weldon Boyce Bridges v. State

In The
Court of Appeals
Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana
No. 06-12-00109-CR
WELDON BOYCE BRIDGES, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 159th District Court
Angelina County, Texas
Trial Court No. CR-27979
Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.
ORDER
In Weldon Boyce Bridges' appeal from a denial of his request for DNA testing, Bridges
has filed with this Court a request to obtaina reporter's record fromthe July 15, 2009, hearing on
his guilty plea in his underlying conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child.1 Bridges
was not entitled to a free record (and did not request one) in that proceeding, as he had no right
to appeal. '
Bridges now asks for a reporter's record of his guilty plea to be prepared and tendered to
this Court as a part of his DNA appeal. While many DNA appeals refer to the record of an
underlying trial, in many of those cases, a record was prepared in the direct appeal from the
conviction, and, in other cases that use such a record, its source is not explained. See generally
Bell v. State, 90 S.W.3d 301, 306 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002); Yarbrough v. State, 258 S.W.3d 205
(Tex. App.—Waco 2008, no pet.); Lewis v. State, 191 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex. App.—San
Antonio 2005, no pet.).
DNA appeals are to be handled like other criminal appeals. Tex. Code Crim. Proc.
Ann. art 64.05 (West 2006). Bridges is therefore entitled to a record of proceedings in his DNA
case. See Tex. R. App. P 34.6. That record—which consists of only a clerk's record, as no
hearing was conducted—has been prepared and filed.
Neither the DNA statute nor the applicable rules require the preparation of a record from
the underlying trial. While such a record might be required under general rules of law under
some combination of facts, Rule 34.1 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure includes in the
Although Bridges sets out a number of other complaints about the proceedings, this appears to be the only one of
his complaints that could possibly trigger relief from this motion.
appellate record "the clerk's record and, if necessary to the appeal, the reporter's record." Tex.
R. App. P 34.1.
We have reviewed the clerk's record from the DNA appeal—which includes the clerk's
record from Bridges' underlying conviction. In this case, a reporter's record for the underlying
plea hearing is unnecessary to Bridges' appeal of his DNA case.
Bridges has specifically requested that DNA testing be done on biological samples
collected during the SANE examination of the victim, suggesting that the DNA of another male
might be, present that would show Bridges' innocence. The State points out that the victim's
outcry and the subsequent SANE exam occurred six months after the alleged assaults and would
thus be singularly useless. Further, our own review of the SANE examination hospital records
contained withinthe clerk's record shows that no biological specimens were collected.2
We will not require the expenditure of public funds and waste judicial resources
mandating a clearly useless act. Bridges' motion is denied.3
BY THE COURT
FILED IN
t-. ,-, ™,- ThaCoaf*zl Appmia,
Date: January 17,2013 Srxih eis*,ot
JAN 17 2013
D©bra Audrey, Cfarfc
2The State explained that little evidence was introduced because of his guilty plea; nevertheless, Bridges had
produced three pairs of juvenile female panties which he claimed he had kept "for protection" in case he was ever
accused of child molestation. The State recognized that there was obviously no chain of custody, indeed, nothingto
show whose they were, but nevertheless had them tested—and that they contained no DNA from a male. Bridges'
petition does not mention the panties, but focuses solely on any specimens obtained during the SANE examination.
3We also remind Bridges that his brief is nearly twenty days late and that, if it is not filed promptly hereafter, his
appeal may be subject to dismissal for want of prosecution.
3