State v. Bol
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) with refusal of a chemical test and driving during revocation. The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding (1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Defendant’s motion to suppress; (2) the district court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the State to reopen its case after it rested; (3) the evidence was sufficient to support Defendant’s convictions; (4) the district court did not err in finding that Defendant’s out-of-state convictions were valid prior convictions for purposes of sentencing enhancement; (5) the district court did not err in modifying its prior finding to reflect that Defendant had three prior DUI convictions instead of two; and (6) the sentences imposed by the district court were within the statutory limits.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.