Opinion
No. 05-02-01702-CR, No. 05-02-01703-CR
Opinion Filed August 4, 2003 Do Not Publish
On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court, Dallas County, Texas, Trial Court Cause No. F02-00910-VR AFFIRM
Before Justices BRIDGES, O'NEILL, and FITZGERALD.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
A jury convicted Donta Cortez Bryant of possession with intent to deliver cocaine and delivery of cocaine; the trial court sentenced Bryant to four years' imprisonment and ten years' imprisonment respectively. In a single point of error, Bryant charges the trial court erroneously admitted photocopies of the currency that was used to purchase the cocaine rather than the actual currency used. The factual nature of this case, as well as its procedural history, pleadings, and evidence are known to the parties. Therefore, we do not recount these matters in detail. We affirm the trial court's judgment. The currency at issue includes a marked twenty dollar bill and a marked one hundred dollar bill. Dallas police detective Larry Littlefield testified at trial that he gave Bryant those two marked bills as payment for cocaine. Officer Catrina Swyryn searched Bryant after his arrest; she testified that she retrieved the marked bills from Bryant at that time. Littlefield testified that, after the bills were recovered, the bills were photocopied and re-circulated for use in future undercover transactions. Bryant complains that the photocopies were not the "best evidence" of the currency and should not have been admitted. We review a trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence for an abuse of discretion. Green v. State, 934 S.W.2d 92, 101-02 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). The rules of evidence state:
To prove the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required by law except as otherwise provided in the rules or by law.Tex.R.Evid. 1002. In this instance, however, the photocopied currency was not offered "to prove the contents of" the currency. The exhibit was offered to show that the same bills used by Littlefield to pay for the cocaine were later retrieved from Bryant, i.e., to underscore the identification of Bryant as the man who sold cocaine to the undercover detective. Moreover, specific exceptions to the best evidence rule also speak to the admissibility of the photocopied currency. Under our rules of evidence, duplicates are admissible generally unless a question is raised concerning authenticity or fairness. See Tex.R.Evid. 1003. Bryant argues his counsel's objection and argument at trial sufficiently raised the issue of authenticity. Regardless, the rules of evidence provide that an original document is not required when the original has been lost or destroyed, so long as the original was not lost or destroyed in bad faith. Tex.R.Evid. 1004(a). The purpose of this rule is to allow the admission of the "best obtainable evidence of a document's contents, if the document cannot as a practical matter be produced." Johnson v. State, 846 S.W.2d 373, 376 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1992) (emphasis original; citing Ortiz v. State, 651 S.W.2d 764, 766 (Tex.Crim.App. 1983)), remanded on other grounds, 853 S.W.2d 574 (Tex.Crim.App. 1993). Littlefield identified the exhibit offered at trial as an accurate photocopy of the bills he marked for the undercover operation. He also testified that the original bills were re-circulated for use in future undercover transactions. His testimony establishes the original bills were not lost or destroyed in bad faith. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's admission of duplicates of the original bills. See Johnson, 846 S.W.2d at 376 (photocopy of bill used to make narcotics purchase was admissible when original was unavailable due to reuse by city). We overrule Bryant's point of error, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court. KERRY P. FITZGERALD, JUSTICE