Judge Boyd grants continuance in McIntyre murder case, orders 30-day expert deadline and transcript search

Judge Stephanie Boyd of the 187th District Court on Monday granted the defense's motion for a continuance in the 2019 murder case against Tamar McIntyre, citing newly disclosed discovery, an outstanding firearms expert report and an unproduced transcript of prior sworn testimony from a state's key witness.

The defense asked for more time after finding a single-line reference in voluminous discovery that suggested a firearm recovered from an indicted codefendant, Jalen Bell, had not been fully tested. Defense counsel said the identity or exclusion of that firearm could be "material" to McIntyre's defense that he was not the shooter. Jay Goldstein and John Hunter, defense lawyers in the case, told the court they had retained a firearms expert, referred to in court as Mr. Husky, who told them he could produce a report but had not yet completed his analysis.

Why it matters: The court record shows the case has been reset multiple times since 2019. The defense said the newly accessible portions of a prior phone extraction and additional statements from codefendants were recently delivered in a form they could use; the defense said it has not had adequate time to process those materials or to receive a final expert opinion on the firearm comparisons.

Details of the hearing

Prosecutor Jason Gerahan told the court he and law enforcement located a firearm and had submitted it for ballistics testing; the state provided a lab report that the defense asked to vet independently. Goldstein said his expert initially believed he could evaluate bench notes and other work product without laboratory access but later told the defense he still required additional time to complete a final report.

Goldstein also told the court late last week he learned the state's chief witness had given sworn testimony before another judge as part of a plea or sentencing proceeding; that transcript has not been produced to the defense. Defense counsel cited a recent Court of Criminal Appeals decision saying such prior sworn testimony must be disclosed "as soon as is practicable." The defense asked the court to obtain or order production of any transcript of that testimony.

Judge Boyd's orders and timeline

- She told the defense to call and confirm with the firearms expert, and the expert said he would have an opinion within 30 days. - She granted the motion for continuance and set jury selection for March 31 (a Monday). The judge limited jury selection to the courtroom (approximately 75 jurors) and refused further requests for special central-jury-room settings that would call 200 jurors and require extra taxpayer-paid juror payments. - She directed the parties to locate the court reporter who handled the earlier proceeding in which the codefendant testified and to produce any transcript of that testimony within the 30-day period. - The judge gave the parties 30 days to process the newly producible phone extraction and related discovery and warned there would be no further continuances without good cause.

What the parties said

Goldstein (defense) said the defense discovered an isolated reference in July 2024 to possible ballistics testing for a firearm linked to codefendant Jalen Bell, and the defense subsequently worked with the prosecutor to locate the evidence. He said the defense engaged Mr. Husky formally around Oct. 10, 2024, but the expert's final report was still pending.

Gerahan (state) confirmed the prosecution had located the firearm, submitted it for testing and provided a ballistics report; he said the state was not intentionally withholding discovery.

Court context and history

Judge Boyd read the case docket into the record, noting the file dates back to 2019 and has been repeatedly continued and set for discovery and trial dates since May 2023. The judge emphasized the court's expectation that parties prepare for trial promptly and be ready when special jury settings are scheduled.

Ending

Judge Boyd said she would grant the continuance but insisted on firm timelines: 30 days for the expert report and transcript production and a March 31 jury-selection setting. She warned parties to avoid future requests for central-jury-room settings that call large numbers of jurors and instructed them to document due diligence on the newly produced phone and evidence material.