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, Caleb Freed, was convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor (DWI) under the "impaired to the slightest degree" standard after a bench trial in the metropolitan court. He appealed to the district court, which affirmed his conviction. The appeal to the Court of Appeals challenged the admission of intoxilyzer breath alcohol test (BAT) results and the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction.

Procedural History

• Metropolitan Court: Convicted the Defendant of DWI under the "impaired to the slightest degree" standard.
• District Court of Bernalillo County: Affirmed the Defendant's conviction.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the State failed to lay a proper foundation for the admission of the BAT results and contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction for DWI. Additionally, claimed that the trial court improperly shifted the burden to the Defendant when the State did not show compliance with accuracy-ensuring requirements.
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): Contended that the Defendant failed to preserve the foundation and burden-shifting issues for appeal. Even if preserved, argued that the State satisfied the foundational prerequisites for the BAT results' admission and that any error in admitting the BAT results was harmless.

Legal Issues

• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the trial court’s finding that the Defendant was impaired to the slightest degree by alcohol and unable to safely operate a vehicle.
• Whether the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the Defendant's BAT results into evidence when the State allegedly failed to establish that the simulator attached to the IR 8000 intoxilyzer used to test his blood alcohol content was approved by the Scientific Laboratory Division (SLD).
• Whether the trial court impermissibly shifted the burden to the Defendant when the State failed to show compliance with accuracy-ensuring requirements.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision, which had affirmed the Defendant's DWI conviction.

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, in a unanimous opinion authored by Judge Jonathan B. Sutin, with Judges Timothy L. Garcia and Roderick T. Kennedy concurring, held that:
  The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for DWI under the "impaired to the slightest degree" standard, given the Defendant's driving behavior, physical condition, admission of drinking, and performance on field sobriety tests (paras 4-10).
  The Defendant failed to preserve the issue of whether the State laid a proper foundation for the admission of the BAT results by not specifically arguing the need for SLD approval of the simulator at trial (paras 11-16).
  The Defendant also failed to preserve the burden-shifting issue for appeal, rendering it moot (para 17).
  Judge Kennedy, in a specially concurring opinion, elaborated on the importance of the external reference standard in ensuring the accuracy of breath test instruments and supported the majority's conclusion regarding the sufficiency of the State's foundation for the BAT results' admission (paras 20-26).