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 driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs (DWI), possession of drug paraphernalia, and driving without insurance. The defendant's appeal challenges the district court's denial of her motion to suppress blood test results and contends that the evidence was insufficient to support her DWI conviction.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Defendant-Appellant: Argued that the district court erred by denying her motion to suppress the blood test results on the grounds that her consent was involuntary, the search warrant lacked probable cause, and there were neither probable cause nor exigent circumstances justifying a warrantless search. Additionally, contended that the evidence presented was insufficient to support her DWI conviction.
• Plaintiff-Appellee: [Not applicable or not found]

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in denying the defendant's motion to suppress the blood test results.
• Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for DWI.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision, denying the defendant's motion to suppress the blood test results and upholding the DWI conviction.

Reasons

• Per Ives, J. (Hanisee, J., and Medina, J., concurring):
  The court found that the defendant validly consented to the blood test, thus not addressing further arguments regarding the suppression of the blood test results. The voluntariness of the defendant's consent was determined based on the totality of circumstances, including the absence of duress or coercion and the presumption against the waiver of constitutional rights. The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the finding that the defendant's consent was voluntary (paras 2-8).
  Regarding the sufficiency of evidence for the DWI conviction, the court reviewed the evidence under the standard that requires viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the guilty verdict. The evidence presented at trial, including the defendant's behavior, the results of field sobriety tests, admissions of substance use, involvement in a car accident, and blood test results indicating methamphetamine presence, was deemed sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was under the influence to such a degree that she was incapable of safely driving a vehicle (paras 9-12).