UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS JASON M. SANDERS and § RODNEY SAULS, SR., § § § Plaintiffs, § § versus § CIVIL ACTION NO.1:20-CV-203 § SKY TRANSPORT, LLC, and § SAID NOOR BARROW, § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Pending before the court is Defendants Sky Transport, LLC (“Sky Transport”) and Said Noor Barrow’s (“Barrow”) (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion to Exclude Officer Michael Trevor Whatley’s Texas Peace Officer’s Report from Evidence (#36). Plaintiffs Jason Sanders and Rodney Sauls, Sr. (“Plaintiffs”), filed a response (#44). Having considered the pending motion, the submissions of the parties, and the applicable law, the court is of the opinion that the motion should be granted in part and denied in part, as follows. I. Background This lawsuit arises out of a motor vehicle accident between two commercial motor vehicles (tractor-trailer rigs) that occurred during the early morning hours of September 19, 2019. At the time of the incident, Plaintiffs were team drivers for U.S. Cryo Carriers, Inc. Sauls was driving, and Sanders was asleep in the sleeping compartment of a U.S. Cryo Carriers, Inc., truck. The other vehicle was driven by Defendant Barrow, the sole owner of Sky Transport. Both vehicles were southbound on U.S. Highway 59 near Shepherd, Texas. Plaintiffs’ truck encountered standing water, which splashed onto Barrow’s windshield. As a result, Barrow felt his truck hydroplane to the right, causing it to clip the driver’s side mirror of Plaintiffs’ truck. Barrow’s vehicle continued into the right lane after the impact and came to a stop on the right side of the road in high water. Plaintiffs’ vehicle slowed and pulled into a nearby gas station.

Trooper Michael Trevor Whatley (“Whatley”) arrived at the scene about an hour later. It is undisputed that he was not present when the incident occurred and that he did not observe the accident. Defendants assert that Whatley spoke to each driver at the scene and subsequently wrote his report based on the drivers’ statements. The report, however, does not contain specific statements attributed to any party to the lawsuit. Barrow was issued a traffic citation for unsafe speed, which was later dismissed. In the instant motion, Defendants seek to exclude the admission of Whatley’s report as inadmissible hearsay. Specifically, they assert that it constitutes hearsay within hearsay because

the information contained therein is based on statements made to Whatley by Plaintiffs and Barrow at the scene. Defendants further contend that the report is untrustworthy because “it contains unsupported conclusions” and because Whatley’s “opinion is a mere guess as to how he thinks the accident occurred.” Plaintiffs counter that the report is admissible under the hearsay exception for a statement of a party opponent, Federal Rule of Evidence 801(2), to the extent that it relies on statements made by Barrow. II. Analysis Under the Federal Rules of Evidence, hearsay, defined as any statement not made by a

person while testifying in the current trial or hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, is inadmissible. FED. R. EVID. 801(c), 802. The exception in Federal Rule of 2 Evidence 803(8), however, provides that a record or statement is admissible if it sets out “factual findings from a legally authorized investigation” and “the opponent does not show that the source of information or other circumstances indicate a lack of trustworthiness.” FED. R. EVID. 803(8); United States v. Noria,

(5th Cir. 2019).

Police reports are generally admissible under Rule 803(8) as public records that set forth factual findings from a legally authorized investigation. Bedford Internet Off. Space v. Travelers Ins. Casualty Co.,

(N.D. Tex. 2014); accord Robert v. Maurice, No. 18-11632,

, at *6 (E.D. La. July, 17, 2020); Ochoa v. Progressive Pipeling Construction, L.L.C., No. SA-13-CV-00122-FB,

, at *2 (W.D. Tex. Sept. 12, 2014). “Certain information in a police report, however, such as witness statements offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, are ‘hearsay within hearsay’ and are inadmissible unless each level of hearsay qualifies under one of the hearsay exceptions.” Bedford Internet Off. Space,

(citing Reliastar Life Ins. Co. v. Thompson, No. M-07-140,

, at *4 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 16, 2008)); see FED. R. EVID. 805 (“Hearsay within hearsay is not excluded by the rule against hearsay if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the rule.”). Public records, including police reports, “are presumed to be trustworthy and admissible; therefore, it is the burden of the party opposing admission to demonstrate a lack of trustworthiness.” Bedford Internet Off. Space,

; Ochoa,

, at *2. “The trustworthiness of a report admitted under [Rule 803(8)] depends on whether the report was compiled or prepared in a way that indicates that its

conclusions can be relied upon.” Bedford Internet Off. Space,

(citing Moss v. Ole South Real Estate, Inc.,

(5th Cir. 1991)). 3 Portions of police reports “that reflect the officers’ first-hand observations based on their investigations and experience are admissible.” Bedford Internet Off. Space,

; see Robert,

, at *6; Reliastar Life Ins. Co.,

, at *4. Information not based on the reporting officer’s personal knowledge, however, constitutes hearsay

within hearsay and does not fall under the Rule 803(8) hearsay exception. Ochoa,

, at *2; see Automatique New Orleans, Inc. v. U-Select-It, Inc., No. 94-3179,

, at *3 (E.D. La. Sept. 25, 1995) (holding a police report was inadmissible because the officer who wrote the report “did not observe anything but merely recorded the observations of another person.”); FED. R. EVID. 602 (“A witness may testify to a matter only if evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that the witness has personal knowledge of the matter.”). “[T]he Fifth Circuit has consistently excluded the portions of police reports that contained the officer’s opinions and conclusions.” Meyer v. Jencks,

, 709 (E.D. La. 2021);

Fox v. Nu Line Transport, LLC,

, at *2 (W.D. La. Mar. 32, 2020); see Robert,

, at *6 (“[P]ortions of [a] police report . . . referencing fault should be redacted [when a police officer] is not testifying as an expert witness.”). Here, portions of the information in Whatley’s report, namely, the description and diagram of how the accident occurred, are based on statements made to him by Plaintiffs and Barrow. These portions contain descriptions of events that Whatley did not personally observe and that were relayed to him post-accident. It is apparent that Whatley merely recorded his interpretation of Barrow’s and Plaintiffs’ descriptions of the incident. Thus, the accident description and

diagram are not admissible to the extent that Whatley lacked personal knowledge of the event. Whatley’s first-hand observations contained in the report, however, are admissible. Further, as 4 the police report does not contain specific statements made by any party to the lawsuit, the court rejects Plaintiffs’ argument that the report is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(2)’s hearsay exception for a statement by a party opponent. Furthermore, Whatley’s report contains information regarding the identity of the parties’

liability insurers. Federal Rule of Evidence 411 provides: Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control. FED. R. EVID. 411; Johnson v. Lopez-Garcia, No. 20-2024,

, at *1 (E.D. La. Aug. 17, 2021); Dempster v. Lamorak Ins. Co., No. 20-95,

, at *2 (E.D. La. Sept. 21, 2020). Here, Defendants admit that Barrow was operating his truck in the course and scope of his employment by Sky Transport and that Sky Transport is vicariously liable for the conduct of Barrow. Thus, evidence of liability insurance is not necessary to prove agency, ownership, or control. There is also nothing to indicate that such evidence is necessary to prove bias or prejudice in this case. Moreover, the admission of evidence of liability insurance would violate the court’s ruling on Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ 1st Motions in Limine, both of which the court has granted. Therefore, the portions of the report indicating that the parties were insured at the time of the accident are inadmissible. Whatley’s report also contains a reference to the traffic citation Barrow received in connection with the accident. In federal court, evidence that one party to an automobile accident was issued a traffic citation or paid a fine pursuant to a traffic ticket is inadmissible if the party pleaded no contest to the citation or it was dismissed. FED. R. EVID. 410 (stating that a nolo contendere plea is not admissible against the party who made the plea in a civil case); Meyer, 513 5 F, Supp. 3d at 708; Robert,

, at *6; Bergeron v. Great W. Cas. Co., No. 14-13,

, at *4 (E.D. La. June 3, 2015) (stating that federal courts “[a]ll agree that evidence of a traffic citation is only admissible if the defendant pleaded guilty to the citation.”); Rhodes v. Curtis, No. 04-476-P,

, at *2 (E.D. Okla. Apr. 12, 2006) (“Evidence of traffic citations is only admissible in a subsequent civil proceeding if the defendant voluntarily and knowingly entered a plea of guilty.”); see Hillyer v. David Phillips Trucking Co.,

(Sth Cir. 1979) (“Defendants concede that the [traffic] ticket was only admissible if [the defendant] made an admission against interest acknowledging that she was guilty of the charge.) Here, there is no indication that Barrow pleaded guilty to the citation. Indeed, the citation was dismissed. Therefore, evidence of the traffic citation is inadmissible. In sum, the court concludes that Whatley’s report is admissible, but only to the extent that it is based on Whatley’s personal observations, and that the portions based on the statements of others, referencing the parties’ insurance coverage, and mentioning Barrow’s citation are redacted. TW. Conclusion Consistent with the foregoing analysis, Defendants’ Motion to Exclude Officer Michael Trevor Whatley’s Texas Peace Officer’s Report from Evidence (#36) is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs are ordered to redact the report consistent with the version attached hereto as Exhibit A.

SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 1st day of November, 2021.

be Core MARCIA A.CRONE- UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Texas Department of Transportation 125 EAST 11TH STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78701-2483 | 512.463.8588 | WWW.TXDOT.GOV

Sun, 26 January 2020

STATE OF TEXAS §

This is to certify that |, Jim Hollis, am employed by the Texas Department of Transportation (Department); that | am the Custodian of Motor Vehicle Crash Records for such Department; that the attached is a true and correct copy of the peace officer's report filed with the Department referred to in the attached request with the crash date of Thu, 19 September 2019, which occurred in Liberty County; that the investigations of motor vehicle crashes by peace officers are authorized by law; that this Texas Peace Officer's Crash Report is required by law to be completed and filed with this Department; that this report sets forth matters observed pursuant to duty imposed by law as to which matters there was a duty to report, or factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law.

Jim Hollis Director, Crash Data & Analysis Section 125 East 11" Street Austin, TX 78701-2483 1-844-274-7457

c ly, ; = a le ; oa, As ead

OUR VALUES: People = Accountability + Trust » Honesty OUR MISSION: Connecting You With Texas

Enforcement and TxDOT Use ONLY [[]scHootsus [RAILROAD []MAsB- [SUPPLEMENT ACTIVE Nu Num Saat 17302326.1 ClscHoo. zone —| nits 4 |Prsns. 3 [ShD □□□□□□□□□ yt’ Texas Peace Officer's Crash Report (Form CR-3 1/1/2018) Mail to: Texas Department of Transportation, Crash Data and Analysis, P.O. Box 149349, Austin, TX 78714. Questions? Call 844/274-7457 Perse Refer to Attached Code Sheet for Numbered Fields of *=These fields are required on all additional sheets submitted for this crash (ex.: additional vehicles, occupants, injured, etc.). Page 1 of Date “Crash Time Case Local Use O98 f 19/2019 | (24HRMM)) 0) 3) 2) 4 2659357 “County "City □□□ Outside LIBERTY Name City Limit dd this crash result In at loast fl Yes Latitude Longitude — to any one person's property? LJ No (decimal degrees) 3 Qo 7 2 8 7 1 0 (decimal degrees) 0 9 5 "Io1 2 5 7 3 ROAD ON WHICH CRASH OCCURRED “1 Rdwy. us “HWY. 59 2 Rdwy. 1 3 Street * Street 4 Street Sys. Num. Part Prefix Name Suffix oO Crash Occurred on a Private Drive or Oo Toll Road! | Speed Const. [x]Yes | Workers []Yes | Street Road/Private Property/Parking Lot TollLane | Limit a5 Zone []No | Present []No | Desc. INTERSECTING ROAD, OR IF CRASH NOT AT INTERSECTION, NEAREST iINTERSECTING ROAD OR REFERENCE MARKER at |1Rdwy. Hwy. 2. Rdwy. Block 3 Street Street 4 Street Int cR Num, 381 Part 1 Num. Profix Name Suffix Distance from Int. E] FT |3 Dir. from int. Reference Street RRX or Ref. Marker 75 JorRef.Marker S Marker Desc. Num. Unit 5 Unit Parked Hitand |LP LP Num. 4 CI vehice {CI pun | State og NUM. pyy6185 VIN, 4,V,4,N,C,9,T,/H,3,C,)N,5,4,1,2),1,8 Veh. 6. Veh. Veh. Veh. 7 Body □□□□ Fire, EMS on Year; 2; 9), 1) 2 |Color RED Make voLvo Model UNKNOWN Style O Emergency □□□□□ □□ 8 DL/ID DUD 8DL 10 CDL 41 DL pos N cl End Rest. o1/,0,1,/,1,9, □□ □ Type 2 State on um. 76112145 ass 98 nd. 96 esl. 98 (MMIDOIYYYY) Address (Street, City, State, ZIP) 3467 ORANGE HOUSE COLUMBUS, OH 43219 : o> : ; 5 Name: Last, First, Middle Bs g x □ a] t]/alu.] 3 □□ 3 Enter Driver or Primary Person for this Unit on first line =¢3 |) 2 & w |< □ □ □ og □□□ x3 SG) 2] P| Fe |PSalRsl □□ □□□□ foson amcor ide fod fo fa fs orf [oe] □□□

EE EE EF cetera □□□□ Drug Results are only reported for Driver/Primary Person for each Unit. PE

[x] Cwner =| Owner/Lessee |Name& Address chy TRANSPORT LLC, 3467 ORANGE HOUSE COLUMBUS, OH 43219

Towed Towed By &J TOWING (281-592-7929) To 1013 N WASHINGTON AVE, CLEVELAND TX 5 Unit Oo Parked 0 Hitand |LP LP Desc ¢ Vehicle Run State wag NUM. 9918S'™ VIN, 1,D,7,¥,6,1,5,2,8,¥,A,2,7,6,6,3,7 Veh. 6. Veh. Veh. Veh. 7 Body Pol. Fine; EMIS on lat Year Color WHI Make UNKNOWN Model UNKNOWN Style TL □□ □□□□□ □□□□ 8 DLIID DL/ID DLID 9DL 40 CDL 11 DL pos Type State Num, Class End. Rest. (MMIDON YY) ! □ Address (Street, City, State, ZIP) : 2 = ; a Narne: Last, First, Middle 52 5 = sly i 3 □ 3 Enter Driver or Primary Person for this Unit on first line =2 oil 2/715 102 JE 4 lal! □□□□□□□ uw ei] =|] —] = jKs[Arl| wn [aw] te □□□□□ □□ PE

EE EF sctreeeate- □□□ Drug Results are only reported for Driver/Primary Person for each Unit. pT Owner =| Owner/Lessee [Name & Address cucwan, GABDULLAHI AXMED, 6300 YORK AVE S APT 101. EDINA) (MN 55435

Towed Towed By J&J TOWING (281-592-7929) To 1013 N WASHINGTON AVE, CLEVELAND TX

Enforcement and TxDOT Use ONLY. Case TxDOT Page = of. CR-3 (Rev. 1/1/2018) iD 2659357 Crash 10 17302326 .1/2019462081 Unit Date of Death Time of Death [Rim | tatento | teensy (BivBRIRY) □□□

Tf hy

Peony One Tan venice Onna As

Unit 10,001+ TRANSPORTING CMV Disabling [x] Yes ]28 Veh. 29 Carrier Camier Num. Lc] ies, CU pazaroousmareriat | L] 9+ CAPACITY Damage? CNo Oper. 1 ID Type 1 ID Num. 02485217 Carrier's Carrier's 30 Veh. Corp.Name SKY TRANSPORT LLC Primary Addr. 3467 ORANGE HOUSE COLUMBUS, OH 43219 Type Bus E]Rovw HazMet Yes |32 HazMat HazMat 32 HazMet HazMat 33 Cargo Type 0 LIGWR | 8/0)0)0)0 Released []No | Class Num. ID Num. Class Num. ID Num. Body Type 3 Unit E]RGVW M4 Thr CMV Disabling [] Yes} Unit CIRGVW HM Trlr. CMV Disabing Yes Num, O1GVwR G0 10 10 | type 2 Damage? [k)No | Num. CL] GvwrR Type Oamage? □□□□ Sequence Intermodal Shipping L] Yes petusl Total Nur. [255041 4 35 Seq. 2 35 Seq. □ 35 Seq. 4 Container Permit [INo | West □□□□ a 6 Contributing Factors (investigator's Opinion) Vehicle Defects (Investigator's Opinion nvironmental and Roadway Conditions __conrouting ___[_MayHavo cont | _Contibutng | Maynivecorm fsa] se ] 4 | a1 | a2 | «3 | a Weather Light Entering | Roadway | Roacdway| Surface Traffic Cond, Cond. Roads Type | Alignment] Conditien | Control

investigator's Narrative Opinion of What Happened (Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary) ITS 1 AND 2 WERE SB ON US 59 UNITS 3 AND 4 TERE SE ON US 59

#1 THE DITCH WHERE THE EHICLE STOPPED, FACING SOUTH, UPRIGHT, WITH DAMAGE TO ITS RIGHT OE #3 320 DAMAGE TO ITS LEFT SIDE.

Time Notified How Time Arrived Report Date (24HR:MM) 9°) 3) 2 | 4 |NotifiedDISPATCH (24HRMM) )2 )9 |wwonrrYy) 09/20/2019 Invest. [] Yes Investigator ID []No |Name (Printed) WHATLEY, MICHAEL TREVOR Num, 15020

+ Service/ |X |D|P |S |1 18 jo Jo | “98° DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF TEXAS Recinpa| Hy) P| □□ □□□ 78

Enforcement and TxDOT Use ONLY [[]scHootsus [RAILROAD []MAsB- [SUPPLEMENT ACTIVE Nu Num Saat 17302326.1 ClscHoo. zone —| nits 4 |Prsns. 3 [ShD □□□□□□□□□ yt’ Texas Peace Officer's Crash Report (Form CR-3 1/1/2018) Mail to: Texas Department of Transportation, Crash Data and Analysis, P.O. Box 149349, Austin, TX 78714. Questions? Call 844/274-7457 Perse Refer to Attached Code Sheet for Numbered Fields of *=These fields are required on all additional sheets submitted for this crash (ex.: additional vehicles, occupants, injured, etc.). Page 3 of Date “Crash Time Case Local Use O98 f 19/2019 | (24HRMM)) 0) 3) 2) 4 2659357 “County "City □□□ Outside LIBERTY Name City Limit dd this crash result In at loast fl Yes Latitude Longitude — to any one person's property? LJ No (decimal degrees) 3 Qo 7 2 8 7 1 0 (decimal degrees) 0 9 5 "Io1 2 5 7 3 ROAD ON WHICH CRASH OCCURRED “1 Rdwy. us “HWY. 59 2 Rdwy. 1 3 Street * Street 4 Street Sys. Num. Part Prefix Name Suffix oO Crash Occurred on a Private Drive or oO Toll Road! | Speed Const. | Workers []Yes | Street Road/Private Property/Parking Lot TollLane | Limit a5 Zone []No | Present []No | Desc. INTERSECTING ROAD, OR IF CRASH NOT AT INTERSECTION, NEAREST iINTERSECTING ROAD OR REFERENCE MARKER at |1Rdwy. Hwy. 2. Rdwy. Block 3 Street Street 4 Street Int cR Num, 381 Part 1 Num. Profix Name Suffix Distance from Int. E] FT |3 Dir. from int. Reference Street RRX or Ref. Marker 75 JorRef.Marker S Marker Desc. Num. Unit 5 Unit Parked Hitand |LP LP Num. 3 4 CI venice {CI pun | State ane Num. r403886 VIN, 3, A, □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ □ Veh. 6. Veh. Veh. Veh. 7 Body Pol. Fire,EMSon year; 2, 9) 1) 8 [Color wor Make FREIGHTLINER Model UNEWOWN Style O Emergency □□□□□ □□ 8 DL/ID DUD 8DL 10 CDL 41 DL pos □ Type 9 State py Num. isso45g4 Class End. oy py Rest. 9¢ (mmioorvyyy, )/,2,2)/,2, 9,7) Address (Street, City, State,ZIP) 4930 GREN ST HOUSTON, TX 77021 : o> : ; 5 Name: Last, First, Middle Bs g x □ a] t]/alu.] 3 □□ 3 Enter Driver or Primary Person for this Unit on first line =¢3 |) 2 & w |< □ □ □ og □□□ x3 SG) 2] P| Fe |PSalRsl □□ □□□□ fee noose ide fed a fa fs [orf [oe] □□□

2 | 2 | lowers, sasow jw [a [a] a [2 [57 | | seesgycae-rcootans Drug Results are only reported for Driver/Primary Person for each Unit. PE

[x] Cwner =| Owner/Lessee [] Lessee [Name Address yy ¢ Cryo CARRIERS LLC, 407 HUNTER PARK LN HOUSTON, TX 77024

5 Unit Oo Parked 0 Hitand |LP LP Desc. ¢ Vehicle Run State py NUM. 1o6Re20 VIN 1,A,9,A,4,4 4,2 3,7,8H,9,3,9,4,7 ,9 Veh. 6. Veh. Veh. Veh. 7 Body Pol. Fine; EMIS on lat Year) 2) 0) 1) 8 [Color war Make UNKNOWN Model UNKNOWN Style TL O □□□□□□□□□□ checked) 8 DLIID DL/ID DLID 9DL 40 CDL 11 DL pos Type State Num, Class End. Rest. (MMWDOI YY) Address (Street, City, State, ZIP) : 2 = ; a Narne: Last, First, Middle 52 5 = sly i 3 □ 3 Enter Driver or Primary Person for this Unit on first line =2 oil 2/715 102 JE 4 lal! □□□□□□□ uw ei] =|] —] = jKs[Arl| wn [aw] te □□□□□ □□ PE

EE EF sctreeeate- □□□ Drug Results are only reported for Driver/Primary Person for each Unit. pT [x] Owner | Owner/Lessee [Name & Address ye CRYO) CARRIERS LLC, 407 HUNTER PARK LN HOUSTON,..TX 77024

Towed Towed By SMITH TOWING (281-592-4000) To 24976 SH 321, CLEVELAND TX 77327

Enforcement and TxDOT Use ONLY. Case TxDOT Page 4 of CR-3 (Rev. 1/1/2018) iD 2659357 Crash 10 17302326 .1/2019462081 Unit Date of Death Time of Death [Rom | Tatnto | okey □□□□□ iy

TP

Popes One Thane Owns es

10,001+ TRANSPORTING CMV Disabling (1 Yes |28 Veh, 29 Carrier Camer | bel igs. CO wazaroousmateriar [LI S+CAPACITY | ornace> FEINo |Oper. IDType a ID Num. 03060457 Carrier's Carrier's 30 Veh. U.S CRYO CARRIERS LLC Primary Addr. 407 HUNTER PARK LN HOUSTON, TX 77024 Type 9 Bus E]Rovw HazMet Yes |32 HazMat HazMat 32 HazMet HazMat 33 Cargo Type 0 CLIGWWR | 8/0)0)0)0 Released []No | Class Num. ID Num. Class Num. ID Num. Body Type 4 E]RGVW 34 Ter CMY Disabling [] Yes} Unit CIRGVw 34 Ter, CMV Disabing Yes OsvwrR B70 9910 10 [type 2 Damage? | Num. CL] SvwrR Type Damage? CINo Sequence Intermodal Shipping L]Yes| Actual Total Num. Of Events 35 Seq. 1 20 35 Seq. 2 36 Seq. 3 35 Seq. 4 Container Permit fx]No Weant Axlas a 6 Contributing Factors (investigator's Opinion) Vehicle Defects (Investigator’s Opinion nvironmental and Roadway Conditions spe )>«)#4tfe)a)= Weather Light Entering | Roadway | Roacdway| Surface Traffic Cond, Cond. Roads Type | Alignment] Condition) Control

EE investigator's Narrative Opinion of What Happened Field Diagram - Not to Scale (Attach Additional Sheets if Necessary)

Time Notified How Time Arrived Report Date (24HR:MM) 9°) 3) 2 | 4 |NotifiedDISPATCH (24HRMM) )2 )9 |wwonrrYy) 09/20/2019 Invest. [] Yes Investigator ID [INo |Name (Printed) WHATLEY, MICHAEL TREVOR Num, 15020 “agen Service/ Num. TIX IDIP IS ]1/8 JO 10 CY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, STATE OF TEXAS Region/DA H, BP] 2 c/o 8