Texas Code of Criminal Procedure art. 38.22 governs when an oral statement may be used against an accused. In Davidson v. State, 25 S.W.3d 183 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000), the Court held that, because art. 38.22 3 (a) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure was procedural in nature, a trial judge is required to apply Texas law to determine the admissibility of an oral confession obtained in another state. Davidson, 25 S.W.3d at 185-6. The Court also held that because the mandatory requirement of art. 38.22, 3(a), that an oral custodial statement must be recorded before it can be used against a defendant, was not followed by the authorities in Montana, appellant's oral confession was inadmissible at his Texas trial. Id. at 186. Under Boykin v. State, 818 S.W.2d 782, (Tex. Crim. App. 1991), the Court is required to follow the plain language of a statute in most cases, and the statute stated that "the courts of this state shall strictly construe" the subsection at issue in Davidson.