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 aggravated driving under the influence of an intoxicating liquor or drugs. The conviction was based, in part, on the results of a breath alcohol test (BAT).

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of San Juan County, John A. Dean, Jr., District Judge.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant: Argued that the district court erred in admitting the BAT results into evidence due to insufficient evidence that the breath machine's certification was current at the time of the test.
• Appellee: Contended that the foundational requirements for the admission of the BAT results were met, and thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the evidence.

Legal Issues

• Whether the district court erred in admitting the breath alcohol test results into evidence without sufficient evidence of the breath machine’s current certification.

Disposition

• The conviction of the Defendant for aggravated driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs was affirmed.

Reasons

• Per LINDA M. VANZI, J. (JENNIFER L. ATTREP, J., and JACQUELINE R. MEDINA, J., concurring):
  The Court found that the State had met its burden to show the admissibility of the BAT results by a preponderance of the evidence. Officer Weaver's testimony that the machine was certified at the time of the test and that he saw the certification attached to the machine was deemed sufficient to meet the State's burden. The Court disagreed with the Defendant's argument that more specific testimony regarding the contents of the certification sticker was required. The foundational requirements for the admission of a BAT card, as established by precedent, were satisfied by the officer's testimony, allowing the district court to conclude that the certification was current at the time of the test (paras 2-5).