 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Spicher11/19/2004
Defendant Kathleen S. Spicher appeals her conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol, arguing the use of prior DUI convictions without proof of such convictions beyond a reasonable doubt violated her due process rights as articulated in Apprendi v.. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 147 L.Ed.2d 435, 120 S.Ct. 2348 (2000), and the record does not contain sufficient evidence to support her conviction. We affirm.
Prior Convictions
This issue has been decided by the Kansas Supreme Court contrary to the defendant's position. See generally State v. Kendall, 274 Kan. 1003, 1013- 15, 58 P.3d 660 (2002). The defendant does not attempt to distinguish her case from the circumstances presented in Kendall but argues that Kendall was improperly decided. In support of her position, the defendant cites United States v. Rodriguez-Gonzalez, 358 F.3d 1156 (9th Cir.2004).
This court is not bound by the decisions of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. We are bound by the decisions of our Supreme Court. See State v. Jackson, 30 Kan.App.2d 288, 299, 41 P.3d 871 (2002). The defendant's argument on this issue provides no basis from which this court may offer the requested relief.
Sufficient Evidence
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the defendant, the evidence clearly supports the conviction. The State produced the videotaped stop, which the district court viewed. From this, the district court was able to assess the defendant's level of competence.
Affirmed.
Page 1 Kansas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|