holding that error was not preserved, notwithstanding consideration of it by the Court of Appeals, where the Court of Appeals has failed to expressly justify its consideration of the unpreserved error
How later courts described this case
- holding that error was not preserved, notwithstanding consideration of it by the Court of Appeals, where the Court of Appeals has failed to expressly justify its consideration of the unpreserved error
- overruled in part by State v. Christiansen, 2010 MT 197, ¶¶ 9-10, 357 Mont. 379, 239 P.3d 949
- "[AJctual physical control of a vehicle results, even though the machine merely stands motionless”
- defendant was in actual physical control despite being asleep or passed out
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
*254 MR. JUSTICE ADAIR:
(concurring in the result)
I concur in the result, but not in all that is said in the foregoing opinion.