Appellant appealed the trial court's judgment of sentence on his conviction for driving under the influence-controlled substance and related crimes. The court affirmed, holding that expert testimony was not necessary to support appellant's conviction for DUI-controlled substance where a testifying trooper opined that appellant was under the influence based upon his observations, the outcome of field sobriety testing, and the officer's training and experience.

Defendant moved for partial summary judgment on plaintiff's claims of less favorable treatment, Family and Medical Leave Act interference and retaliation, and for equitable relief.

Voluntary manslaughter plea entered after amendments to Penal Code §§188 and 189 precluded reliance on those amendments as basis for eligibility for resentencing

Motion List & Order on Application released on:April 24, 2024