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 for careless driving and DWI per se based on breath test results indicating an alcohol concentration of .12 and .12. The conviction followed observations by Sergeant Molander of the Defendant's driving and the administration of field sobriety tests by Officer Frazier, during which the Defendant swayed during the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) test (paras 1, 4, 5).

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Jacqueline D. Flores, District Judge, affirming the Defendant's convictions for careless driving and DWI per se.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Defendant): Argued that he was subjected to a de facto arrest without proper cause, challenged the sufficiency of evidence for the DWI per se conviction, and contended that the State failed to lay a proper foundation for Officer Frazier’s testimony on the field sobriety tests (paras 3, 4, 5).
• Appellee (State): Maintained that the observations of the Defendant's driving, the results of the breath test, and the administration of field sobriety tests provided sufficient evidence for the convictions (paras 4, 5, 6).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant was subjected to a de facto arrest.
• Whether the district court erred in delivering a guilty verdict for DWI per se when it found the Defendant not guilty of driving under the influence to the slightest degree and had serious doubts about the sufficiency of the evidence.
• Whether the State failed to lay a proper foundation for Officer Frazier’s testimony on the Defendant’s field sobriety tests (paras 3, 4, 5).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s affirmance of the Defendant's convictions for careless driving and DWI per se (para 8).

Reasons

• RODERICK T. KENNEDY, Chief Judge (JAMES J. WECHSLER, Judge, MICHAEL D. BUSTAMANTE, Judge concurring):
  The Court noted the Defendant's acceptance of the proposed disposition regarding the de facto arrest by not challenging it, affirming this issue based on extensive details provided in the notice (para 3).
  On the issue of the DWI per se conviction, the Court found that the breath test results of .12 and .12 supported the conviction under NMSA 1978, §66-8-102(C)(1), regardless of whether the facts supported a finding of driving under the influence to the slightest degree (para 4).
  Regarding the foundation for Officer Frazier’s testimony on field sobriety tests, the Court concluded that, except for the HGN test, field sobriety tests are not the product of scientific evidence requiring the Daubert/Alberico standards. The Court also noted that the officer’s observations of the Defendant's performance on the field sobriety tests were properly admitted and that the officer did not improperly opine about the results of the field sobriety tests to prove a specific blood alcohol content (paras 5, 6, 7).