PA Superior Court: Not Every Fatal Automobile Accident Is Criminal

Criminal Defense Lawyer Zak T. Goldstein, Esquire

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has decided the case of Commonwealth v. Fretts, holding that a defendant should not be charged with homicide by vehicle solely because the defendant committed traffic offenses prior to a fatal accident. Instead, the traffic offenses must have actually caused the accident, and the defendant must have acted recklessly. In other words, fatal accidents, no matter how tragic, are not always a crime.

Commonwealth v. Fretts

The defendant was driving a garbage truck in Philadelphia and struck a bicyclist. The defendant was making a right turn and the bicyclist was traveling straight when the accident occurred. There was no evidence that the defendant was speeding at the time of the accident. The intersection where the accident occurred is regulated by a traffic light and both the defendant and the bicyclist were proceeding into the intersection when the light was green. After the accident, the defendant remained at the scene and he was not issued any traffic citations. Unfortunately, the bicyclist died from his injuries. The defendant was then subsequently charged with homicide by vehicle, involuntary manslaughter, and reckless endangerment. 

At the preliminary hearing, the Commonwealth presented evidence to establish the above facts. Additionally, the Commonwealth played video of the incident. One of the videos showed that the bicyclist was in the defendant’s blind spot. The other video was video from the garbage truck. This video did not show the that defendant was distracted while driving the garbage truck, however it does show that the defendant failed to use a turn signal. Also, a photograph was presented that showed that the intersection had a bicycle lane and that there were signs that read “BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE” and “YIELD TO BIKES.” For whatever reason, the Commonwealth did not formally submit the videos into evidence. At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, the municipal court judge ruled that the Commonwealth had presented enough evidence to establish a prima facie case for all charges. 

The defendant then filed a pretrial Motion to Quash, asserting that the Commonwealth failed to make out a prima facie case against him and seeking to have the Court of Common Pleas dismiss all of the charges against him. The trial court granted the motion to quash and dismissed all of the charges against the defendant. The Commonwealth then filed a notice of appeal. The Superior Court granted the Commonwealth’s appeal and remanded the matter back to the trial court to consider the video evidence. 

The court held a new hearing, and at this hearing, the trial court again dismissed the charge of homicide by vehicle because the Commonwealth’s evidence was insufficient to show that the defendant acted recklessly. However, the trial court did not dismiss the charges of involuntary manslaughter or recklessly endangering another person. The Commonwealth then appealed to the Superior Court again. On appeal, the Commonwealth argued that the trial court erred when it held that the evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case because the evidence showed that the defendant failed to yield the right-of-way to the bicyclist, interfered with her straight procession across the intersection, and failed to signal his turn. 

What is Homicide by Vehicle? 

75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3732 governs the crime of Homicide by Vehicle. The statute provides: 

Any person who recklessly or with gross negligence causes the death of another person while engaged in the violation of any law of this Commonwealth or municipal ordinance applying to the operation or use of a vehicle or to the regulation of traffic except section 3802 (relating to driving under influence of alcohol or controlled substance) is guilty of homicide by vehicle, a felony of the third degree, when the violation is the cause of death.

            This offense has three elements: 1) that the defendant violated a statute or ordinance relating to operating or use of a vehicle or regulation of traffic other than the driving under the influence statute; 2) that the violation caused the death of another person; and 3) that the defendant’s conduct was reckless or grossly negligent. The state of mind of gross negligence under the homicide by vehicle statute is the same as recklessness. A defendant acts recklessly when he had both the actual knowledge of a substantial and unjustifiable risk and disregarded that risk despite that knowledge.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court’s Decision  

The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s decision because the evidence was insufficient to establish that the defendant acted recklessly. According to the Superior Court, there was no evidence that the defendant knew that there was a bicyclist beside the truck when he made the right turn, no evidence that he failed to look before he made the turn, and no evidence that distracted driving caused the accident. 

Additionally, the Superior Court was unpersuaded by the Commonwealth’s argument that because the defendant violated three sections of the Vehicle Code (failure to yield to a bicyclist, interference with the bicyclist’s straight procession through the intersection, and failure to use a turn signal), that these violations were sufficient to show that the defendant was acting recklessly. The Superior Court held that none of these violations were probative to show that there was a conscious knowledge of a substantial risk or conscious decision to act notwithstanding the risk. Therefore, the defendant will not be forced to stand trial against the charge of homicide by vehicle. 

Facing Criminal Charges? We Can Help. 

Goldstein Mehta LLC Criminal Defense Lawyers

If you are facing criminal charges or under investigation by the police, we can help. We have successfully defended thousands of clients against criminal charges in courts throughout Pennsylvania and New Jersey. We have successfully obtained full acquittals in cases involving charges such as Conspiracy, Aggravated Assault, Rape, and Murder. Our award-winning Philadelphia criminal defense lawyers offer a free criminal defense strategy session to any potential client. Call 267-225-2545 to speak with an experienced and understanding defense attorney today.