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

• In the early hours of September 15, 2011, Officer Jared Frazier of the Albuquerque Police Department's DWI unit observed Defendant Janice Hale driving with no lights on and with expired vehicle registration. Upon initiating a traffic stop, Officer Frazier noted signs of intoxication, including red eyes and a strong odor of alcohol. Defendant admitted to consuming three or four drinks earlier that night. Field sobriety tests (FSTs) were administered, during which Defendant exhibited signs of impairment. Subsequent breath tests showed blood alcohol concentration (BAC) results of 0.08 and 0.07. Defendant contested the charge, arguing her driving was not impaired and attributing any performance issues on the FSTs to factors other than alcohol (paras 2-8).

Procedural History

• Defendant was convicted by a jury in metropolitan court of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor (DWI) (first) (para 1).
• The district court affirmed the metropolitan court's judgment (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued insufficient evidence to convict her of DWI, asserting no impairment was proven as her driving did not exhibit bad behavior, and any issues during the FSTs could be attributed to factors other than alcohol, such as misunderstanding instructions or the inherent unreliability of FSTs (paras 11-12).
• Plaintiff-Appellee: Maintained that the evidence, including Officer Frazier's observations, Defendant's performance on FSTs, and BAC results, sufficiently proved Defendant's impairment to the slightest degree necessary for a DWI conviction (paras 9-15).

Legal Issues

• Whether there was sufficient evidence to convict the Defendant of DWI impaired to the slightest degree, given the State's obligation to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alcohol in her system impaired her driving (para 10).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's judgment, upholding Defendant's conviction for DWI impaired to the slightest degree (para 16).

Reasons

• Per Jonathan B. Sutin, with James J. Wechsler and Timothy L. Garcia concurring, the court found substantial evidence supporting the conviction. The court emphasized that bad driving is not a prerequisite for a DWI conviction if impairment can be inferred from other evidence. The court dismissed Defendant's arguments regarding the reliability of FSTs and alternative explanations for her performance, noting the jury's role in weighing evidence credibility. The court concluded that the totality of evidence, including observations of Defendant's behavior, performance on FSTs, and BAC results, was sufficient for a rational jury to find Defendant impaired to the slightest degree by alcohol (paras 9-15).