Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-3180-CR State v. Roesing

By: dmc-admin//June 18, 2001//

00-3180-CR State v. Roesing

By: dmc-admin//June 18, 2001//

Listen to this article

Victoria D. Roesing appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury found her guilty of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant or other drug contrary to Wis. Stat. sec. 346.63(1)(a) (1999-2000). Roesing claims that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion when it: (1) denied the defendant’s motion in limine to exclude HGN (Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus) test evidence; (2) denied the defendant’s request to use the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration student manual to impeach the officer’s testimony; and (3) denied the defendant’s motion for a mistrial when the State told the jury that Roesing was given her Miranda rights. Because the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion when it denied the defendant’s motion in limine to exclude the HGN test, or when it denied the defendant’s request to use the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration student manual to impeach the officer’s testimony, or when it denied the motion for a mistrial, this court affirms. This opinion will not be published.

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests