Loading…
In every DWI case in County Court at Law No. 2 the State must produce, on or before the 60th day after the information is filed, the laboratory's accreditation, inspection and non-compliance records, testing and calibration-curve policies and sample-selection criteria (A); validation studies, batch standards and controls, quality-control, refrigeration, proficiency, balance and pipette records, personnel training and discipline, and maintenance records (B); instrument identity, consumables, t0 reporting, calibration curve and chromatograms, batch logs, machine parameters and mass-spectrometer library, hit-list and tune reports (C); case records, bench notes, vial identification, uncertainty measurement, chain of custody and quality action plans (D); and a defense inspection opportunity (E); late production is reviewed case by case for admissibility of the blood-test result, and cases already on file had a December 31, 2023 deadline.
Applies to DWI blood-test cases in County Court at Law No. 2 of Bexar County (Judge Melissa Saenz); the court's counterpart to the amended standing blood-test discovery order adopted county-wide (TOPICs doc 467). Procedural information only; not legal advice.
2023 SO 19 — STATE OF TEXAS AND THE HANDLING OF DWI CASES — IN THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2, BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS. SPECIAL ORDER DIRECTING THE STATE TO PRODUCE BLOOD TEST RECORDS. THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS the State to produce the following documents pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, Watkins v. State, and Article 39.14 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure: A. Items Related to General Laboratory Matt
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-09-08 from the TOPICs custody file (five pages; OCR text layer read in full, the garbled caption and the signature page checked through the vision lane — signed "Judge Melissa Saenz, County Court at Law No. 2"). Single current signer, so judge-joined.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.
Standing order of the 109th Judicial District Court for every pending or later-filed case in Andrews, Winkler and Crane Counties: any attorney or self-represented litigant who uses any form of artificial intelligence for legal research or drafting in a case must, before using AI-generated information in a court submission or proceeding, sign and submit the court's certification form stating that all language, quotations, sources, citations, arguments and legal analysis created or contributed to by generative AI were verified as accurate by a human through traditional (non-AI) legal sources, and acknowledging responsibility and potential sanctions for their or their co-counsel's failure to comply. Effective immediately; in effect until rescinded or replaced.
1 verified requirement in this section
Verified requirements for Judge Melissa Saenz unlocks with a Single Report ($29) or Professional ($99/month) — create a free account to preview the dossier first.
Unlock free →0 checklist steps in this section
Verified the action checklist unlocks with a Single Report ($29) or Professional ($99/month) — create a free account to preview the dossier first.
Unlock free →