State v. Zeiner

Summary

The court held that the jury instruction for DUI was legally insufficient because it did not define "operate" as "drive," which requires movement of the vehicle. Although the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that Zeiner drove while intoxicated, the instructional error was not harmless because the prosecutor's arguments and the evidence could have led the jury to convict based on Zeiner's conduct while parked. The court reversed the DUI conviction and remanded for a new trial with proper instructions.