Claxton v. City of Lynchburg

Opinion

KOONTZ, C.J.

James Thomas Claxton (Claxton), appellant, was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) as a second offense and refusing to submit to a blood or breath test. Claxton contends that the evidence, which included certain incriminating statements he made to the arresting officer, was insufficient to establish the corpus delicti of the offense of DUI. The sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to support Claxton’s conviction for DUI. For the reasons that follow, we find that sufficient evidence supports the conviction and, accordingly, we affirm.

On…