Opinion ID: 1294870
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Abuse of Discretion Argument.

Text: Smith's second argument surely must be tongue-in-cheek. He argues that the district court, in the earlier OWI case, had abused its discretion by allowing Smith to be accompanied from the courthouse by his lawyer, and this somehow justified his escape. He argues the temptation to bolt was just too great; the flesh is weak and in this circumstance, without the presence of a deputy, who ... would not take advantage of the opportunity to quietly and peacefully leave? This argument suffers from two major defects: first, the decision to flee was Smith's, not his attorney's or the court's. Any connection between the court's actions and Smith's flight is tenuous at best. Second, the earlier OWI sentencing was purely collateral to his present case, and any challenge to the court's exercise of discretion in the earlier case may not be raised in this one. We reject Smith's abuse-of-discretion argument. AFFIRMED.