10 results for 'cat:"DUI" AND cat:"Jury Instructions"'.
J. McKinnon finds that the trial court properly instructed the jury that it could conclude defendant was in actual physical control of his vehicle while intoxicated for the purposes of a DUI count even if he was unconscious. It was also proper to allow the state to rebut a closing argument in which counsel argued the state was dishonest in deciding not to introduce a photo of defendant asleep across the bench seat of his truck. However, the imposition of a $5,000 fine violated the constitutional proportionality requirement since it did not take into account defendant's ability to pay. Reversed in part.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: McKinnon, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: DA 21-0413, Categories: Sentencing, dui, jury Instructions
J. Abele finds that although the trial court added a recklessness element to the jury instruction for defendant's driving with fictitious license plates charge, defendant was not prejudiced. It decreased the likelihood of a guilty verdict and did not affect the outcome of the trial. Meanwhile, defendant's erratic driving, admission to the arresting officer he had been "snorting a perc," and the officer's testimony about slurred speech and constricted pupils was sufficient to support his conviction for driving while impaired. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Abele, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-1036, Categories: dui, Vehicle, jury Instructions
J. Shorr finds the trial court properly provided a “Miles instruction” to the jury that convicted defendant of DUII. The term “intoxicants” in the Miles instruction refers to “either or both intoxicating liquor and controlled substances.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Shorr, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: A176781, Categories: dui, jury Instructions
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Hiland finds the court of appeals improperly reversed the trial court's defendant's convictions for DWI and refusal to submit to testing after his arrest for being passed out drunk in his vehicle on the side of the road. The arresting officer testified he had difficulty awakening defendant, who eventually referred to the officer as "mom." The officer smelled alcohol and saw other signs of defendant's intoxication. No abuse of discretion is found in the court's denying a mistrial where defense opened the door to allegedly prejudicial statements about defendant's blood alcohol level or where the possible prejudice could have been cured by an admonition to the jury. Vacated.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hiland, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: CR-22-452, Categories: Evidence, dui, jury Instructions
J. Moore finds that defendant's murder conviction was supported by sufficient evidence of implied malice: high blood-alcohol level, predrinking intent to drive, knowledge of the hazards of DUI and highly dangerous driving. Also, he failed to show that vehicular manslaughter is a lesser included offense of a murder charge, and the trial court was not obligated to give the jury an instruction on the lesser related offense of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Moore, Filed On: December 12, 2023, Case #: G061812, Categories: dui, Vehicular Homicide, jury Instructions
J. Randolph finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of driving under the influence (DUI) third offense. Defendant was pulled over after almost colliding with a police vehicle on a roadway. During the traffic stop, the officer saw an open beer can in the console of the vehicle and smelled alcohol on the defendant, resulting in a certified DUI officer being called to the scene. The certified DUI officer administered a field sobriety test, which defendant failed, and she was taken into custody and ticketed for careless driving and driving under the influence. Defendant argues the lower court’s handling of jury instructions prejudiced the outcome of her trial, and that she received ineffective assistance from trial counsel. The instant court finds no error in the lower court’s handling of jury instructions and that the defendant abandoned her ineffective assistance of counsel claim by failing to state an issue. Affirmed.
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court, Judge: Randolph, Filed On: September 21, 2023, Case #: 2022-KA-00754-SCT, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, dui, jury Instructions