D. Vancos v. Montana DOT

Summary

The court held that the District Court properly admitted evidence that Vancos had consumed alcohol because the evidence was relevant to whether his perception and response to the approaching vehicle were impaired. However, the District Court legally erred by refusing to take judicial notice of Vancos’s undisputed BAC merely because the supporting medical record had not been admitted, and that error prejudiced his substantial rights. The court therefore affirmed the jury-instruction ruling, reversed in part, and remanded for a new trial.