By: dmc-admin//July 8, 2002//
William R. Estes appeals from the judgment, following a jury trial, convicting him of his second offense of driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated. He first challenges the trial court’s refusal to sequester the arresting officer during the jury trial. We determine that the trial court appropriately exercised its discretion in authorizing the officer to assist the prosecutor during the trial. Estes’ second challenge is to the sufficiency of the evidence that he operated his car on a public highway while intoxicated. Our review of the record establishes that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict.
Therefore, we reject both of Estes’ challenges and affirm his conviction for his second offense of operating while intoxicated.
This opinion will not be published.
Dist II, Washington County, Ziegler, J., Anderson, J.
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Walter Arthur Piel Jr., Milwaukee
For Respondent: Todd K. Martens, West Bend; Stephanie Hanson Mayne, West Bend