 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Commonwealth v. Bullick8/4/2003
s regarding a defendant's guilt may be resolved by the fact-finder unless the evidence is so weak and inconclusive that as a matter of law no probability of fact may be drawn from the combined circumstances. The Commonwealth may sustain its burden of proving every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt by means of wholly circumstantial evidence. Moreover, in applying the above test, the entire record must be evaluated and all evidence actually received must be considered. Finally, the trier of fact while passing upon the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence produced, is free to believe all, part or none of the evidence.
Commonwealth v. Gooding, 2003 PA Super 74, 4 (quoting Commonwealth v. DiStefano, 782 A.2d 574, 582 (Pa. Super. 2001) (citations omitted)).
9 The offense of reckless driving is defined in the Motor Vehicle Code as follows:
§ 3736. Reckless Driving
(a) General Rule.-Any person who drives any vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving.
75 Pa.C.S. § 3736, amended 1990, May 30, P.L. 173, No. 42, § 17, effective April 1, 1992.
10 Thus, the offense of reckless driving has two elements: an actus reus-driving a vehicle; and a mens rea- "in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property." Assuming, arguendo, that Appellant's confession was properly admitted and considered, the Commonwealth satisfied its burden of demonstrating the actus reus-that Appellant was driving a vehicle. This is of no consequence, however, because we find that the Commonwealth failed to demonstrate that Appellant possessed the necessary mens rea.
11 Prior to analyzing the Commonwealth's circumstantial evidence for a determination of whether it proves the offense, we believe it is helpful to delve into the history of the offense of reckless driving and to delve deeper into the mens rea element implicated thereby. Previously, "reckless driving" was found at 75 Pa.C.S. § 1001, and defined as follows: "Reckless driving is unlawful, and for the purpose of this act, is construed to include the following: (1) Any person who drives any vehicle or streetcar or trackless trolley omnibus upon a highway carelessly disregarding the rights or safety of others, or in a manner so as to endanger any person or property. (2) If investigation into an accident arising from the use and operation of a motor vehicle discloses that the accident occurred due to the front seat of the motor vehicle having been occupied by more than three (3) persons...." 12 The statute was amended in 1990 and currently reads, as set forth above. Notably the offense, although still titled "reckless driving," now requires the actor to drive in "willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property." However, the offense previously known as reckless driving has not truly disappeared. It has been renamed careless driving and is found at 75 Pa.C.S. § 3714. The offense reads:
§ 3714. Careless driving
Any person who drives a vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of careless driving, a summary offense.
However, from another perspective, the offense of reckless driving has simply come full circle, as the offense was amended in 1951 to remove "willful or wanton conduct in the operation of a vehicle as an essential element of the offense." Commonwealth v. Forrey, 92 A.2d 233, 234 (Pa. Super. 1952). Thus, the current offense of reckless driving mirrors that which existed prior to the 1951 amendment but is supplemented by the additional offense of careless driving.
13 The mere
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pennsylvania DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|