Opinion ID: 1843643
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Sufficiency of Evidence for OWI.

Text: The crime of operating while intoxicated has two elements. The state must first prove the defendant operated a motor vehicle. Iowa Code § 321J.2. Second, the state must prove the defendant was, at the time, under the influence of an alcoholic beverage or other drug, or some combination, or had an excessive blood alcohol level. Id. Truesdell does not argue there was insufficient evidence to show he was under the influence or that he operated a motor vehicle. Instead, he asserts there was insufficient evidence to show he was under the influence while he operated a motor vehicle. He points out that the witnesses who observed him driving a vehicle and the police officers who later arrested him at the trailer park did not testify to any facts at trial concerning his state of intoxication. Consequently, he claims the evidence in the case only showed he was under the influence while at the jail. Truesdell correctly argues that the State must establish that he was intoxicated at the time he operated a motor vehicle. Nevertheless, the record reveals substantial evidence to support such a finding in this case. We have previously said that a person is under the influence when the consumption of alcohol affects the person's reasoning or mental ability, impairs a person's judgment, visibly excites a person's emotions, or causes a person to lose control of bodily actions. See State v. Dominguez, 482 N.W.2d 390, 392 (Iowa 1992). In this case, the jury could have believed Truesdell's unusual and audacious conduct in the grocery store showed an impaired judgment and ability to reason. Truesdell also drove the vehicle at a high rate of speed, and nearly struck store employees in the parking lot. Additionally, Truesdell acknowledged he consumed alcohol prior to the incident and police observed numerous signs of alcohol intoxication after he was arrested an hour or so after he was observed operating the vehicle. Under this record, there was substantial evidence to support a finding that Truesdell was under the influence of an alcoholic beverage at the time he operated a motor vehicle.