 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dobrinski v. State8/9/2001
Appellant, Mark Dobrinski, was charged with the offense of failure to stop and render aid. TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN. § 550.021 (Vernon 1999). A jury later found appellant guilty and sentenced him to five years confinement in the Institutional Division of TDCJ. Challenging his conviction, appellant now raises four issues for review. We affirm.
Background
Around 9:00 p.m. on January 15, 1999, Ha Nguyen was driving northbound on Interstate 45 when she began experiencing car trouble. Nguyen decided to pull over on the shoulder of the highway and call for assistance. She called a friend, Chaudhry Riaz. After Riaz arrived at the scene, he determined that a tow truck was needed and called James Cook, a tow truck operator. Upon arrival, Cook positioned his tow truck in front of Nguyen's car. Cook then stood on the driver's side of his truck and began to operate the truck's lift controls. Cook was struck and killed by appellant's vehicle in the far right lane of the Interstate. The driver did not stop and render aid. Subsequently, police questioned appellant about the incident. At trial, appellant admitted that he was driving on I-45 north when his vehicle collided with something, however, he thought it was a construction marker.
Issues Three and Four
In his third and fourth issues for review, appellant alleges that the State's evidence was factually and legally insufficient to sustain a conviction for failing to stop and render aid. Specifically, appellant contends the State failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he knew someone sustained personal injury on the night in question. We disagree.
In determining whether the evidence is legally sufficient to support the verdict, we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the verdict, asking whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Weightman v. State, 975 S.W.2d 621, 624 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Lane v. State, 933 S.W.2d 504, 507 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 318-19).
In contrast with legal sufficiency, a review of factual sufficiency requires consideration of the evidence in a neutral light. Johnson v. State, 23 S.W.3d 1, 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) (citing Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d. 126, 134 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996)). We conduct such a review by examining the evidence weighed by the jury that tends to prove the existence of an elemental fact in dispute and compare it with the evidence tending to disprove that fact. Johnson, 23 S.W.3d at 7. Under a factual sufficiency review, a court will set aside a verdict only if it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Id.
The following are elements comprise the offense of failure to stop and render aid offense: (1) a driver of a vehicle (2) involved in an accident (3) resulting in injury or death of any person (4) intentionally and knowingly (5) fail to stop and render reasonable assistance. TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN. §§ 550.021, 550.023 (Vernon 1999); Allen v. State, 971 S.W.2d 715, 717 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.). Before an accused may be held culpable for failing to stop and render aid, he must have knowledge that an accident occurred. Goss v. State, 582 S.W.2d 782, 785 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). Therefore, the culpable mental state required for the offense of failing to stop and render aid is that the accused have knowledge that an accident occurred. Id.; Baker v. State, 974 S.W.2d 750 (Tex. App.--San Antonio, 1998, pet. ref'd).
At trial, appellant testified that he momentarily fell asleep while driving northbound on Interstate 45. Subseque
Page 1 2 Texas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|