People v. Montgomery

Defendant was convicted, after jury trial, of DUI. Through testimony of arresting officer, State presented ample evidence to support conclusion that Defendant was impaired, and evidence was unrefuted. Court did not abuse its discretion when it declined to instruct jury that it could infer that contents f missing video recording were detrimental to the State. Court did not plainly err when it failed to ask one juror whether he understood and accepted the principle that Defendant was not required to produce any evidence on his own behalf.(JORGENSEN and SCHOSTOK, concurring.)