Bekendam, Stephanie Lynn

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that although the point of error on appeal must comport with the objection made at trial, reviewing courts are not hyper-technical in their examination of whether error was preserved
• holding that to preserve error for appellate review, the issue on appeal “must comport with the 1 Sitting by assignment pursuant to section 74.003(b) of the Texas Government Code 04-22-00061-CR objection made at trial”
• explaining that a complaint of error on appeal must comport with the objection made at trial
• stating that, “[w]e are not hyper-technical in examination of whether error was preserved, but the point of error on appeal must comport with the objection made at trial”
• holding a test performed by a trained expert, with a validated and calibrated instrument, was reliable even though the test did not strictly follow the Department of Public Safety’s policy
• explaining that “preservation of error is a systemic requirement on appeal” and that “a court of appeals should review preservation of error regardless of whether the issue was raised by the parties”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).