P. v. ONeill
Appellant Michael Howard ONeill comes before us after pleading guilty to driving with a blood alcohol of 0.08 or more and possession of methamphetamine. As a part of his negotiated plea, he also admitted three prior convictions all involving drunk driving. He was placed on probation for five years on the condition that he serve one year in county jail. Upon his acceptance of the terms and conditions of probation all other charges were dismissed.
Appellant challenges what he claims to be a warrantless seizure of appellant. In particular he argues that Officer Lewiss testimony was not credible and therefore the trial courts denial of the motion to suppress was without substantial evidence. However, the basis of appellants claim lies in the following few excerpts from Officer Lewiss testimony: The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on P. v. ONeill