Driving While Intoxicated Case Law Update - Texas District ...

concerning how recently the vehicle was driven and how much time elapsed between the accident
and the officer's arrival, left insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict which was ordered
reversed and a judgment of acquiftal rendered.
Pointgr v. State, 201 1 W L 2163721 (Tex.App.-Dallas 201 1).
The defendantwas involved in a one-car accident with a parked car and wasfound to be intoxicated
at the scene. Evidence showed he was the registered owner of the vehicle and no one e/se uras
in the vehicle. He admitted having four or five drinks two hours before the wreck, and he failed the
sobriefy fesfs. Officer arrived at the scene twelve minutes after receiving the dispatch. Court
concluded that the evidence was sufficient to link defendant's intoxication to his driving, and there
was sufficient corroboration to his statement that he was driving the vehicle
Scillitani v. State, 343 S.W.3d 914 (Tex.App.-Houston [14 Dist.] 2011).
This involved officer coming upon defendant's vehicle in a ditch off the road. Court of Appeals
originally found an insufficient temporal link. Court of Criminal Appeals reversed and remanded in
light of Kuciemba. On remand Court of Appeals found evidence was sufficient to show that
defendant was intoxicated while driving, as required to support conviction for driving while
intoxicated (DWI) ; defendant was involved in single car accident where he left road and struck fence
pole, there were no skid marks on road to indicate that defendant had applied brake, defendanttold
trooper who responded to dispatch call of accident that he was driver, trooper noticed alcohol on
defendant's breath, defendant exhibited numerous c/ues of intoxication during field sobriety fesfg
and preliminary breath samples taken within two hours showed defendant's breath alcohollevelto
be .135 and .133.
Warren v. State , 2011 WL 4036139 (Tex.App.-Houston [1'Dist.] 2011, pet. filed).
Officer comes upon defendant's vehicle in a ditch with defendant standing outside the vehicle.
Challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to say he was intoxicated at the time he was driving. In
holding evidence was sufficient, Court of Appeals focused on the following:
1) Defendant drove his car into a ditch and was found intoxicated at the scene of the accident.
2) Deputy testified that the hood of defendant's truck was still warm, indicating to him that the
truck
had been recently driven.
3) He also testified that the inside of the cab was warmer than the outside temperature of 60
degrees Fahrenheit.
4) Deputy found an open container of alcohol in the cab of the truck and saw that some of the
drink
had spilled onto the passenger's seaf which he assumed happened at time of accident.
Huqhes v. State, 325 S.W.3d 257 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2010, no pet.).
Officer was dispatched to one-car accident and encountered defendant walking alongside highway.
159