 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Albertson2/11/2004
Albertson appeals an order of the district court requiring her to pay restitution pursuant to Iowa Code section 910.3B (2001). AFFIRMED.
Seventeen-year-old Brandy Albertson invited some friends, including eighteen-year-old Kevin Kieffer, to her apartment. Albertson offered the friends "morphine pills" which they all accepted. Kieffer also was consuming alcohol. He passed out and eventually died.
Albertson pled guilty to three counts of delivery of a schedule II controlled substance, dilaudid (hydromorphone). See Iowa Code §§ 124.401(1)(c)(8) and 124.206(2)(a)(11) (2001). The district court pronounced sentence. Then the court raised the applicability of Iowa Code section 910.3B. This statute authorizes restitution of at least $150,000 where "the offender is convicted of a felony in which the act or acts committed by the offender caused the death of another person." Following a restitution hearing, the court ruled that Albertson caused the death of Kieffer, entitling Kieffer's estate to $150,000 in restitution.
Albertson raises a single issue on appeal: "whether the district court erred in concluding that defendant's act of delivery of a controlled substance 'caused' the death of Mr. Kieffer, within the meaning of Iowa Code section 910.3B." Our review is for errors of law. State v. Starkey, 437 N.W.2d 573, 574 (Iowa 1989). Findings of fact have the effect of a special verdict. State v. Watts, 587 N.W.2d 750, 751 (Iowa 1998). They are binding on us if supported by substantial evidence. State v. Bonstetter, 637 N.W.2d 161, 165 (Iowa 2001).
Under Iowa Code section 910.3B, "commission of the offense must have been the proximate cause of the victim's death." State v. Izzolena, 609 N.W.2d 541, 553 (Iowa 2000). A defendant's conduct is the proximate cause if "(1) conduct is a 'substantial factor' in bringing about the harm and (2) there is no other rule of law relieving the defendant of liability...." State v. Hubka, 480 N.W.2d 867, 869 (Iowa 1992). Proximate cause often turns on the concept of foreseeability. State v. Ayers, 478 N.W.2d 606, 608 (Iowa 1991).
With respect to the first element, the district court determined that,
But for the Defendant's act of suggesting that he take the pills, providing him the pills for consumption at a time when he was drinking alcohol, he would not have died. The Defendant's act was a substantial factor in bringing about his death, and the Court finds the Defendant certainly could foresee that combining alcohol and dilaudid could result in harm to the victim, even if she did not exactly foresee that he would die.
The record contains substantial evidence to support these findings. See Bonstetter, 637 N.W.2d at 168 (stating district court "must find causal connection between the established criminal act and the injuries to the victim."). Albertson asked the youth if they wished to go to her apartment to drink. Once there, Albertson offered them prescription morphine pills. Kieffer took two. Later, he asked Albertson for more. Although Albertson initially refused, she eventually tired of resisting and threw the bottle of pills in Kieffer's direction. Kieffer took two more pills. Throughout the evening, he was also drinking beer. One friend estimated that he consumed an entire case. Eventually, Kieffer passed out on Albertson's couch. The next morning, Kieffer was still unconscious. Paramedics arrived and transported him to a hospital, where he died.
An autopsy revealed that Kieffer died from complications as a result of intoxicating substances in his body. The physician who performed the autopsy testified that Kieffer's blood alcohol content was.118 at the time he was admitted to the
Page 1 2 Iowa DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|