 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Crawford6/3/2003
A jury found defendant guilty as charged of second degree murder, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter, driving while under the influence of alcohol and causing bodily injury, and four counts of reckless driving causing injury to four different victims. In addition to the noted guilty verdicts, the jury returned true findings on four multiple victim special allegations under Vehicle Code section 23558 and four great bodily injury special allegations under Penal Code section 12022.7, subdivision (a). Based on the jury's guilty verdicts and true findings, the trial court sentenced defendant to a determinate term of 17 years in state prison followed by an indeterminate term of 15 years to life.
Defendant raises numerous claims of error in this appeal directed at challenging the jury's guilty verdicts and the trial court's sentence. We recount the details of defendant's claims below in our discussion of his various assertions. We agree with defendant's claim that he was improperly convicted of gross vehicular manslaughter and the necessarily included offense of vehicular manslaughter and therefore we will reverse the latter conviction. We also agree with several of defendant's claims of sentencing error and, therefore, will modify the judgment accordingly.
FACTS
The facts essentially are undisputed. According to the evidence presented at trial, defendant has a history of traffic and speeding violations that dates back to December 1994 when a police officer watched defendant drive his pickup truck in the center passing lane of a city street in order to pass 10 or more vehicles. When the passing lane ended, defendant drove on the wrong side of the road to pass one or two more cars. Several cars were forced to move out of defendant's way to avoid a collision. After the police officer pulled defendant over, he determined defendant was driving on a suspended license. In an inventory search, the officer found a glass pipe that contained residue of methamphetamine under the seat of defendant's truck. Because defendant also exhibited symptoms of being under the influence of methamphetamine, the officer arrested him for driving on a suspended license, driving under the influence of a controlled substance, and possessing narcotics paraphernalia.
One month later in January 1995 a police officer stopped defendant for having a defective license plate and a bald tire on his truck. The officer determined that defendant did not have a valid driver's license. In July 1997 a police officer cited defendant for speeding -- 62 miles per hour in a 40 mile-per-hour zone and on a wet roadway. The Department of Motor Vehicles designated defendant a negligent vehicle operator and placed him on probation in October 1997.
In January 1998 an officer cited defendant for driving 65 miles per hour in a 35 mile-per-hour zone on Highway 111. In March 2000 a Palm Springs Police officer cited defendant for speeding and not having evidence of insurance. In April 2000 defendant completed an online traffic school course. In May 2000 defendant was cited again for speeding, driving 98 miles per hour on Interstate 10.
Two citizens called 911 to report defendant for speeding on June 18, 2000. Michelle Jofre placed the first call and reported that a truck was driving 10 to 15 miles per hour faster than the flow of traffic, swerving around and passing slower moving cars on a city street. Jofre called 911 on her cellular phone because she feared that the driver would cause an accident. Jay Margery placed the second 911 call on June 18 to report a truck going "very fast" on Sunrise in Palms Springs. The police located a truck near the Spa Casino i
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|