Commonwealth v. Cady
300 Va. 325
Va.2021Background:
- Mark Spencer Cady was convicted by a jury of misdemeanor reckless driving under Va. Code § 46.2-852 after his vehicle struck and killed a stopped motorcyclist.
- Collision occurred on a clear, straight two-lane road; the motorcycle was stopped in Cady’s lane with its left-turn signal on and was within his unobstructed view.
- Cady had music playing, said he did not remember seeing or striking the motorcycle, and asked "What happened?" after the crash; no evidence of environmental obstruction or medical emergency.
- The trial court entered conviction; a split panel of the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that no rational jury could find criminal recklessness as a matter of law.
- The Commonwealth appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court, which framed the dispute around the mens rea required for misdemeanor reckless driving and the proper sufficiency-of-the-evidence standard on appeal.
- The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the conviction, holding that a rational juror could infer a prolonged and total failure to keep a lookout sufficient for reckless driving.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for misdemeanor reckless driving | Evidence (music, lack of recollection, unobstructed view of stopped motorcycle) supports inference of prolonged failure to look = reckless disregard | At most a momentary lapse/simple negligence; not criminally reckless | Reversed Ct. of Appeals; evidence viewed in Commonwealth's favor could permit a rational jury to find reckless mens rea and sustain conviction |
| Applicable mens rea & appellate standard | Reckless driving requires reckless disregard/indifference to safety; apply objective standard and Jackson review (light most favorable to prosecution) | Court of Appeals misapplied law by resolving credibility/inferences against jury verdict | Affirmed objective standard for criminal negligence; applied Jackson sufficiency test; appellate court erred in substituting its judgment for jury's reasonable inferences |
Key Cases Cited
- Cady v. Commonwealth, 72 Va. App. 393 (Va. Ct. App. 2020) (Court of Appeals decision reversing conviction; split panel)
- Powers v. Commonwealth, 211 Va. 386 (Va. 1970) (defines mens rea for reckless driving as reckless disregard/indifference)
- Noakes v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 338 (Va. 2010) (applies objective standard: defendant knew or should have known probable results)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (establishes standard for sufficiency review: could any rational trier of fact find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)
- Sullivan v. Commonwealth, 280 Va. 672 (Va. 2010) (restates Jackson sufficiency test in Virginia context)
- Williams v. Commonwealth, 278 Va. 190 (Va. 2009) (appellate courts must not reweigh evidence or reassess witness credibility)
- Mayo v. Commonwealth, 218 Va. 644 (Va. 1977) (distinguishes speeding, misdemeanor reckless driving, and involuntary manslaughter by degree of hazard posed)