AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The Defendant was convicted of DWI (first offense) and failure to maintain lane after being observed by an officer drifting between lanes and exhibiting signs of alcohol impairment during a traffic stop. The Defendant contended that the State did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his driving was impaired by alcohol to the slightest degree, challenging the validity of his DWI conviction as a violation of due process. Additionally, the Defendant argued that his momentary and quickly corrected drifting over the dashed lane lines did not present any safety concerns, challenging his conviction for failure to maintain his lane.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Briana H. Zamora, District Judge, affirming the metropolitan court judgment convicting the Defendant of DWI (first offense) and failure to maintain lane.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alcohol in his system impaired his driving to the slightest degree, rendering his DWI conviction invalid as a violation of due process. Additionally, contended that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for failure to maintain his lane, as his momentary drifting over the lane lines did not present any safety concerns.
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): In response to the Defendant's appeal, did not add new facts or authority against the proposed summary reversal of the Defendant’s conviction for failure to maintain his lane and asked for the relief contemplated by the Court in the second calendar notice.

Legal Issues

• Whether the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alcohol in the Defendant's system impaired his driving to the slightest degree, rendering his DWI (first) conviction invalid as a violation of due process.
• Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the Defendant's conviction for failure to maintain his lane.

Disposition

• Reversed the Defendant’s conviction for failure to maintain his lane and remanded for resentencing in light of such reversal.
• Affirmed the Defendant’s conviction for DWI.

Reasons

• The Court, comprising Judges Cynthia A. Fry, Timothy L. Garcia, and J. Miles Hanisee, found that while the Defendant's conduct leading up to the stop did not support a conviction for failure to maintain his lane, the totality of the circumstances supported the Defendant's conviction for DWI. The Court observed that the Defendant was seen driving at about 2 a.m., drifting between lanes, and exhibited signs of alcohol impairment during the traffic stop, including bloodshot, watery eyes, slurred speech, and a strong odor of alcohol. Despite the Defendant's testimony regarding a childhood eye injury affecting his performance on field sobriety tests, the Court deferred to the trial court's assessment of witness credibility and found substantial evidence supporting the DWI conviction. The Court reversed the conviction for failure to maintain his lane, agreeing with the Defendant that the momentary and quickly corrected drifting did not present any safety concerns as required by applicable law (paras 1-10).