 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Zambuto v. State3/24/1999
4017 NOTICE Memorandum decisions of this court do not create legal precedent. See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d) and Paragraph 7 of the Guidelines for Publication of Court of Appeals Decisions (Court of Appeals Order No. 3). Accordingly, this memorandum decision may not be cited for any proposition of law, nor as an example of the proper resolution of any issue.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT
[No. 4017 - March 24, 1999]
Appeal from the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, Fairbanks, Wm. Ronald Smith, Magistrate.
Terrance M. Zambuto appeals his conviction for driving while intoxicated. He contends that the evidence against him was gathered during an illegal traffic stop, a stop that was not supported by reasonable suspicion.
The district court held an evidentiary hearing on Zambuto's claim. Based on the testimony presented at that hearing, Magistrate William Ronald Smith concluded that the police officer who stopped Zambuto had had articulable reason to suspect that Zambuto was driving while intoxicated.
The legality of the traffic stop hinges on the factual issues resolved at the evidentiary hearing. If the State's evidence is credited, the stop was supported by reasonable suspicion. Because Zambuto is the appellant, it is his burden to show that the magistrate's view of the facts was clearly erroneous. Zambuto has not argued, much less demonstrated, that the magistrate's Conclusions are clearly erroneous. We therefore uphold the magistrate's findings and, consequently, the legality of the traffic stop.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Page 1 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|