The court proceedings on April 4, 2025, in the 187th District Court, presided over by Judge Stephanie Boyd, focused on the case of the State vs. McIntyre. The session involved extensive discussions regarding the admissibility of evidence and the testimony of witnesses related to a crime scene investigation.

During the meeting, the defense raised multiple objections concerning hearsay and the foundation for witness testimonies. Judge Boyd ruled on several objections, sustaining some while overruling others. Notably, the defense's objection regarding hearsay was sustained when it pertained to testimony about actions not directly observed by the witness. This ruling highlighted the importance of direct evidence in court proceedings.

The witness, identified as Miss Vivante, provided testimony about her role in processing evidence from the crime scene, which included the exterior of a vehicle found in a commercial parking lot. She described the environment around the vehicle, noting the presence of various items, including an SD card and a rosary pendant, which were found in close proximity but lacked clear connections to the case. Vivante explained that her investigation did not follow a strict perimeter but was guided by the presence of potential evidence.

The discussion also covered the collection of biological evidence and latent prints from the vehicle. Vivante indicated that she swabbed areas likely touched by individuals but did not use bioluminescent agents like luminol, as she was unaware of any significant struggle occurring inside the vehicle. This point raised questions about the thoroughness of the investigation, especially given the case's complexity, which spanned multiple locations.

The examination of firearms evidence was another critical aspect of the proceedings. Vivante confirmed the recovery of three gun magazines from the vehicle, each belonging to different manufacturers. The defense sought clarification on the calibers of the firearms associated with these magazines, emphasizing the importance of this information in understanding the case's context.

As the session progressed, the defense continued to challenge the witness's recollection and the procedures followed during the investigation. The court's focus on the admissibility of evidence and the witness's credibility underscored the legal complexities involved in the case.

Overall, the proceedings highlighted the intricate nature of crime scene investigations and the legal standards governing the admissibility of evidence in court. The case is set to continue as both sides prepare to present further evidence and testimonies.