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 DWI (refusal, first offense) following a traffic stop. The conviction was based on a conditional guilty plea entered by the metropolitan court. The case involved a motion to suppress Officer Miller's testimony due to the loss of the lapel video recorded during the traffic stop.

Procedural History

• Metropolitan Court: Convicted the Defendant for DWI (refusal, first offense) based on a conditional guilty plea.
• District Court of Bernalillo County: Affirmed the metropolitan court's conviction following an on-record review.

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress Officer Miller's testimony because the State lost the lapel video from the traffic stop.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying the Defendant's motion to suppress Officer Miller's testimony due to the loss of the lapel video from the traffic stop.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of the Defendant for DWI (refusal, first offense).

Reasons

• Per TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, J. (JONATHAN B. SUTIN, J., and J. MILES HANISEE, J., concurring):
  The Court of Appeals remained unpersuaded by the Defendant's arguments against the district court's decision to deny his motion to suppress Officer Miller's testimony on the basis of the lost lapel video. The Court applied the standard for lost evidence established in State v. Chouinard and found no basis for reversal, declining the Defendant's invitation to re-examine the Chouinard holding. The Court emphasized adherence to Supreme Court precedent, indicating that the Court of Appeals is bound by such precedents.