Tulsa Criminal Defense Attorney | Reckless Driving Charge | Cale Law Office
This content was written for Cale Law Office
If you’ve been charged with a crime, you need aggressive legal representation. Call Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale at 918-277-4800. Your initial consultation with the Cale law office is free. Attorney Stephen Cale has nearly 2 decades of legal experience. His practice focuses on criminal defense.
Prosecutors charged the defendant with the first-degree manslaughter because he killed a person while driving a car and changing lanes in a no change zone. First-degree manslaughter is a felony. Whereas negligent homicide is a misdemeanor. The punishment range for first-degree manslaughter is for years to life imprisonment. For negligent homicide, the punishment range is not more than one year the county jail.
In this case, the underlying is demeanor alleged for the manslaughter charge was reckless driving. On appeal, the defendant argued that the only an appropriate under the circumstances was negligent homicide. He argued that the later statute was enacted more recently that the manslaughter statute. Because of this, is more specifically aimed at traffic-related deaths. Further must have been intended to supersede or partially repeal the first-degree manslaughter statute of the circumstances of this case.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has grappled with the negligent homicide statute in its proper application many times, said Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale. The statute is aimed at a limited class of homicides. Those include homicides committed by a motor vehicle driver acting in a reckless disregard for the safety of others. The question is whether the statute precludes application of other homicide statutes and are law. If so, what circumstances should be limited? Another question was whether the negligent homicide statute is intended to restrict proper discretion in selecting what charges to bring.
A year after the enactment of the negligent homicide statute, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals held that the new law did not prevent the state from seeking first-degree manslaughter conviction against the person had been charged with manslaughter the commission of a vehicle-related defense. This included driving under the influence of intoxicants. The appellate court reasoned that a manslaughter charge was appropriate because driving under the influence of intoxicants did not necessarily require the state to prove any reckless disregard of the motors part. This role also extends to another misdemeanor involving alcohol and motor vehicles. By this the court means driving while impaired.
Previously, the appellate court held that due to the similarities between the crimes of negligent homicide and second-degree manslaughter, the former statute superseded the latter. This was in cases where the death was allegedly caused by the criminal negligence of another by driving a motor vehicle. Underlying this result was the assumption that the legislature cannot a particular course of conduct be punishable under more than one statute. The previous case the defendant was tried for manslaughter after a fatal collision. The evidence suggests that the defendant was being at the time the crash. While cans of beer were found in his vehicle, there is no basis for concluding that he was intoxicated when the accident occurred. The jury ultimately convict him of negligent homicide, were sent lesser offense.
On appeal, the defendant argued that the trial court should be sustained his demurrer to the manslaughter charge. The reviewing the history of the appellate court’s dealings with negligent homicide law, and observed that while driving under the influence of intoxicants was one example of a misdemeanor offense. It was not the only one. Because the defendant was convicted of negligent homicide on a lesser related offense, the appeals court did not determine whether’s conduct would’ve supported a conviction for the first-degree manslaughter however, it fell no statutory Impala pediment.
Later, the defendant was charged with first-degree manslaughter the commission of reckless driving. Reckless driving is a traffic related misdemeanor that includes speeding. Defendant was driving and speeds of more than 100 miles per hour when he was involved in a pattern collision. The charge of reckless driving was predicated on the defendants excessive speed. The court noted that the negligent homicide statute is more recent than the manslaughter statute. Additionally, specifically directed vehicle or homicides. The appellate court interpreted the statute to reflect the same degree of culpability describing the negligent homicide statute. It concluded that allowing a first cream manslaughter charge for the death cost by speeding would leave little substance to the negligent homicide statute.
Tulsa criminal defense attorney Stephen Cale has handled cases involving homicide. This includes murder and conspiracy to commit murder. If you or someone you know has been charged with a homicide crime whether be murder, manslaughter or negligent homicide, call the Cale law office at 918-277-4800 to schedule your free initial consultation. Attorney Stephen Cale has nearly 20 years of experience as a lawyer. He focuses his practice on criminal defense.
Several years later, the appellate court limited its holding in the previous case. Please were pursuing the defendant for an outstanding warrant. He drove the high speeds through a residential area and hit another vehicle. The impact killed one of its occupants. Prosecutors charged the defendant with first-degree misdemeanor manslaughter. The underlying misdemeanor was escaping in alluding an officer. On appeal, he argued that the previous case law precluded the charge of misdemeanor manslaughter because’s conduct fell within the kind of reckless disregard addressed in the negligent homicide statute. The appellate court rejected his claim in the from the conviction. It affirmed based on the particular charges brought in the legal elements to be proven.
When the first things that attorney Stephen Cale will do is try to get your case dismissed. He does this by looking to see whether prosecutors properly filed the charge. If not, he will file a motion to quash and seek dismissal. Secondly, he will file discovery motion. This compels the state to turn over evidence that has against the client. This includes not only negative evidence but evidence that may be favorable to the defendant. Attorney Cale will use this information to see whether not the charge can be dismissed for lack of evidence.