In Anderson v. State, 268 S.W.3d 130 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 2008), rev'd, 301 S.W.3d 276, 279 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009), the appellant made an unsworn oral motion for continuance so he could secure his own DNA testing, which the trial court denied. The court of appeals acknowledged that an unsworn oral motion generally preserves nothing for appeal, but held that, if the denial of an oral motion for continuance amounted to the denial of due process, then an appeal would be viable. It went on to find that the appellant "was deprived of the opportunity to present a complete defense" as a result of the denial of his oral motion. Anderson, 301 S.W.3d at 278. In reversing, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that there is no due process exception to the procedural requirements of Articles 29.03 and 29.08 and that due process rights, as well as the right to present a complete defense, may be forfeited by failing to comply with those procedural requirements. Id. at 280.