JOVANY PAREDES, Appellant v. STATE OF TEXAS (Other)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS NO. PD-1420-11 JOVANY PAREDES, Appellant v. STATE OF TEXAS ON APPELLANT S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS HARRIS COUNTY Per curiam. OPINION Appellant was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life without parole. He appealed, arguing that he had been denied his right to confrontation when the lab director, rather than the analyst who performed his DNA test, testified at trial about the test results. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, concluding that the lab director s testimony PAREDES - 2 did not violate the Confrontation Clause. Paredes v. State, No. 14-10-00266-CR, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 6693 (Tex. App. Houston [14th District] August 23, 2011) (not designated for publication). Appellant has filed a petition for discretionary review of this decision. We recently addressed this issue in Burch v. State, No. PD-0943-12, 2013 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 945 (Tex. Crim. App. June 26, 2013). In Burch, we held that the Confrontation Clause was violated by the admission of a drug analysis when the reviewing analyst, rather than the testing analyst, testified at trial. In that case, the person who testified did not participate in the testing or witness the tests being performed. The Court of Appeals in the instant case did not have the benefit of our opinion in Burch. Accordingly, we grant Appellant s petition for discretionary review, vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals, and remand this case to the Court of Appeals in light of Burch. DATE DELIVERED: August 21, 2013 DO NOT PUBLISH
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
