 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Pitts v. State1/18/2002
James William Pitts, Jr. appeals his conviction and sentence on two counts of vehicular homicide, three counts of reckless driving, and one count each of driving under the influence, attempting to elude an officer, speeding, driving with a suspended license, and driving with an expired license tag. He contends the evidence was not sufficient to support the verdict.
Construing the evidence in favor of the verdict shows that Georgia State Patrol Officer Warren clocked Pitts with a radar gun driving 76 mph, which exceeded the posted speed limit, through an intersection on Georgia Highway 120 in Paulding County. Warren pursued Pitts and activated his blue lights and wig-wag headlights in an effort to initiate a traffic stop. When he did, the video camera in his patrol car also turned on, and the entire sequence was recorded and later played for the jury at trial.
Warren first turned around at the intersection, then had to catch up to Pitts. He was "closing in" on Pitts just prior to another intersection at Bobo Road, a two lane road. Pitts turned right onto Bobo Road. After Warren made the turn in pursuit, he caught up to Pitts and turned on his siren. Pitts did not stop, but instead accelerated to pass another car even though there was a double yellow line. Pitts briefly tapped his brakes then accelerated as he ran through a four-way-stop intersection even though another car was stopped there. Pitts then turned right at another intersection onto Tabor Road. At the first sharp curve in that road, Pitts drove almost completely in the wrong lane.
In the following straight section of the road, with which Warren was well familiar, Warren decided to use the Pursuit Intervention Technique (PIT) maneuver in an attempt to stop Pitts before he reached upcoming intersections. Warren had been trained to make the PIT maneuver, he chose to use it to protect the public on the roadway, and he performed the maneuver in accordance with his training. He pulled along side of Pitts intending to tap Pitts' truck on the right rear quarter causing it to spin out of control. At that moment, Pitts' truck actually moved toward Warren's patrol car thereby inadvertently initiating the PIT maneuver. Pitts' truck flipped and wrecked, and Warren stopped and returned to the site. The entire chase took only 1 minute and 49 seconds.
Tragically, unbeknownst to Warren until that time, Pitts' eight- week-old daughter was a passenger in the truck. She was seriously injured in the accident and later died.
Analysis of Pitts' urine indicated the presence of both methamphetamine and marijuana. Evidence was also presented that Pitts' driver's license was suspended and that his license tag had expired.
1. Pitts contends that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction of vehicular homicide because it showed that Warren caused the child's death by executing the PIT maneuver.
In order to be convicted of vehicular homicide under OCGA § 40-6- 393, the conduct of the defendant must have caused the death. See Williams v. State, 165 Ga. App. 831, 832 (302 SE2d 736) (1983). See also Hill v. State, 250 Ga. App. 9, 12-13 (2) (550 SE2d 422) (2001). This requires showing that "the defendant's conduct was the `legal' or `proximate' cause, as well as the cause in fact, of the death." Miller v. State, 236 Ga. App. 825, 828 (2) (513 SE2d 27) (1999). "An injury or damage is proximately caused by an act or a failure to act whenever it appears from the evidence in the case that the act or omission played a substantial part in bringing about or actually causing the injury or damage and that the injury or damage was either a direct result or a reasonably probable consequence of the
Page 1 2 Georgia DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|