 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Moreno v. State9/28/2005
Appellant, Roxie Moreno, was tried by the court and found guilty of the offenses of DWI, fourth offense; refusal to submit to a chemical test; and driving with a suspended license. She does not challenge the conviction for driving with a suspended license, and we affirm the other two convictions.
Chris Clark, an officer with the Sherwood Police Department, testified that on February 29, 2004, he observed appellant driving a white Ford Escort on Landers Road at 2:26 a.m. He stated that her vehicle was moving at a slow rate of speed and that when he checked her license tag it "returned to a white Cavalier," rather than a white Ford Escort. He explained that he signaled for her to stop and that in doing so she drove her vehicle into a pile of sheetrock. Officer Clark stated that appellant told him she did not have her license or identification with her; that she did not have proof of insurance or registration; and that she identified herself as Barbara Standridge. He stated that he smelled a strong odor of intoxicating beverage; that appellant's eyes were glassy and bloodshot; and that her speech was slurred. He testified that he later identified her as Roxie Moreno.
Officer Clark stated that he had appellant exit her car and that she was unsteady on her feet. He said that when he asked her if she had been drinking, she told him it had been five hours since she had had a drink. Clark testified that he had her perform some sobriety tests. On the horizontal-gaze nystagmus test, he said that "she showed all six cues." On the walk-and-turn test, he stated that she was not able to stand or walk as instructed. On the one-leg stand test, he testified that she could not stand as instructed.
Clark stated that he placed appellant under arrest at that time. He testified that based upon his training, experience, observation of her driving, and the results of her sobriety tests, he formed the opinion that she was impaired and unsafe to drive.
At the police station, Clark stated that he set up a breathalyzer exam for appellant and read her her rights. He stated that she initially refused to take the test, but then agreed to do so. He said that the machine was operating properly; that he explained to her how to blow into the tube; and that she kept blocking the end of the tube with her tongue. He said that she took the mouthpiece off, threw it on the ground, and stated, "Charge me with refusal."
In addition, Officer Clark summarized the facts that she was driving a white Ford Escort, while the license plate belonged to a white Cavalier; that her license was suspended for DWI and she had some outstanding warrants; that she gave a false name and date of birth; that she ran into a pile of sheetrock when he pulled her over; and that in his opinion she was intoxicated when he pulled her over. On cross-examination, he explained that he did not inform appellant of her right to have additional tests because she had not given him a proper first test.
Debbie Stokes, who worked as a detention officer at the Sherwood Police Department, testified that she was present the night that appellant was brought to the jail. She stated that she heard the rights form read word for word to appellant; that appellant used her tongue to interfere with the performance of the breathalyzer test; that she told appellant not to put her tongue on the tube; and that appellant took the tube and threw it on the floor and said that she refused. Stokes also testified that she could smell the odor of intoxicants on appellant and that her speech was slurred. The State submitted evidence of appellant's prior DWI convictions and then rested its case.
For her first point of a
Page 1 2 3 Arkansas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|