State v. Jones

Full title: STATE OF IOWA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEASA J. JONES, Defendant-Appellant

Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa

Date published: Feb 24, 2005

695 N.W.2d 507 (Iowa Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 5-105 / 04-1211

Filed February 24, 2005

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Lee (South) County, Gary R. Noneman, District Associate Judge.

Leasa Jones appeals her conviction for driving while under the influence. AFFIRMED.

Linda Del Gallo, State Appellate Defender, and James G. Tomka, Assistant Appellate Defender, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Jean C. Pettinger, Assistant Attorney General, and Michael Short, County Attorney.

Considered by Vogel, P.J., and Mahan and Vaitheswaran, JJ.

VAITHESWARAN, J.

A jury found Leasa Jones guilty of driving while under the influence. Iowa Code § 321J.2 (2003). Jones contends the evidence is insufficient to establish she was "under the influence." The standards for reviewing this type of challenge are well established and will not be repeated here. See State v. Laffey, 600 N.W.2d 57, 59 (Iowa 1999).

The jury was instructed as follows:

A person is "under the influence" when, by drinking liquor and/or beer, or by consuming other drug, or by a combination of such substances, one or more of the following is true:

1. Her reason or mental ability has been affected.

2. Her judgment is impaired.

3. Her emotions are visibly excited.

4. She has, to any extent, lost control of bodily actions or motions.

You are hereby instructed that the term "under the influence" means the same as the term "intoxicated."

The jury could have found sufficient facts to satisfy this instruction based on the following record. A Keokuk police officer stopped the pick-up truck Jones was driving because the tires squealed. He "detected an odor of intoxicating beverage" and noticed that Jones had slurred speech and bloodshot eyes. He asked Jones whether she had been drinking that evening and she said she had. The officer administered several field sobriety tests. Jones failed all of them. The officer determined she was intoxicated.

Although the record contains contrary facts elicited from Jones and her relatives, the jury was free to give more credence to the officer's testimony. Laffey, 600 N.W.2d at 59.

AFFIRMED.