ALFRED VERNON KOHLER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1988-12-01
No. 88-53
ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ„ concur.
534 So. 2d 1213 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1988)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

Computerized driving records are admissible evidence to prove prior convictions for sentencing purposes in felony DUI cases.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was convicted of felony DUI. The state introduced his computerized driving record to prove the necessary prior convictions for the felony en…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
DAUKSCH, Judge.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction and sentence for felony driving while under the influence of alcohol (DUI) in violation of section 316.193(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1985). Appellant was found guilty by a jury of driving under the influence (DUI), after which the trial court proceeded to sentence appellant as a felon. As proof that appellant had the four or more DUI convictions necessary for felony DUI, the state had introduced appellant’s computerized driving record into evidence at trial, outside the presence of the jury.

The sentencing proceeding was tantamount to that of a felony petit theft proceeding at which the historical facts of prior convictions must be proven. The court noted that the driving record had been previously admitted into evidence and the defendant did not offer any evidence that the record was not accurate, see, Pritchard v. State, 528 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Defense counsel only objected that the driving record was not best evidence or was hearsay.

Computerized driving records are admissible as evidence under section 322.201, Florida Statutes (Supp.1986). The compu terized driving record is competent evidence since it is, as the statute requires, an abstract of the court records of convictions and is a complete driving record duly certified by the machine imprint of the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Defendant’s computerized driving record proved the requisite prior DUI convictions and the conviction and sentence are affirmed.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ„ concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw