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 involved in a legal matter concerning his fourth DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) charge, which was treated as a felony due to it being the fourth offense. The case also involved a discrepancy regarding the classification of the DWI as simple or aggravated based on the Defendant's blood alcohol content being .16 or above.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: The Defendant did not oppose the summary affirmance proposed in the calendar notice and did not file a memorandum in opposition to the second calendar notice.
• Plaintiff-Appellee (State): The State also did not file a memorandum in opposition to the second calendar notice.

Legal Issues

• Whether the Defendant's fourth DWI should be classified as a simple DWI (fourth offense) or as an aggravated DWI (.16 or above).

Disposition

• The Court affirmed the decisions on Issues 1-4.
• The Court reversed the decisions on Issues 5 and 6.
• The case was remanded to the district court to correct the judgment and sentence to reflect the Defendant’s conviction for simple DWI (fourth offense) rather than aggravated DWI (.16 or above), in accordance with the jury’s verdict forms.

Reasons

• Per Cynthia A. Fry, J. (Jonathan B. Sutin, J., and Linda M. Vanzi, J., concurring): The Court decided to affirm on Issues 1-4 and reverse on Issues 5 and 6 based on the responses to the calendar notices and the lack of opposition from both parties. The Defendant admitted to the correct sentencing for his fourth DWI, acknowledging it as a felony. However, the Court found a need to remand the case for correction in the judgment and sentence to align with the jury's verdict, which indicated a conviction for simple DWI (fourth offense) rather than aggravated DWI (.16 or above) (paras 1-3).