Davis v. Commonwealth
57 Va. App. 446
| Va. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Davis, the appellant, was involved in a January 6, 2009 incident where he drove after drinking and struck Ronald White, who died at the scene; there were no skid marks and the car showed front undercarriage damage while Davis exhibited a .15 BAC.
- Rainey warned Davis of an object in the road; Davis admitted to drinking and that he swerved after seeing the object, but testified he was looking at his phone intermittently.
- Davis was convicted in general district court of driving under the influence (DUI) and, subsequently, was indicted by a grand jury on aggravated involuntary manslaughter under Code § 18.2-36.1(B) for the same incident.
- At trial, an expert testified that a blood alcohol level of .15 would impair judgment and reaction time, and that Davis’s blood alcohol level at the time of impact would have been higher.
- The jury convicted Davis of aggravated involuntary manslaughter, and Davis appealed, challenging double jeopardy and sufficiency of causation and negligence evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether DUI and aggravated involuntary manslaughter constitute the same offense for double jeopardy. | Davis argues two prosecutions for one act violate Double Jeopardy. | Commonwealth contends the statutes have different elements and thus are separate offenses. | No constitutional double jeopardy violation; offenses have distinct elements. |
| Whether Code § 19.2-294 bars prosecution for both offenses. | Davis contends the second conviction violates the statutory bar on double prosecutions. | Commonwealth argues § 19.2-294 applies only to successive prosecutions, not simultaneous ones. | Not applicable; prosecutions are not barred by § 19.2-294. |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence that White's death was caused by Davis driving under the influence. | Davis asserts texting, not intoxication, caused the death. | Commonwealth presented evidence that intoxication impaired Davis’s driving and caused the collision. | Sufficient evidence supported causation; intoxication contributed to the accident. |
| Whether there was sufficient evidence of criminal negligence supporting aggravated involuntary manslaughter. | Davis contends there was no reckless disregard for life. | Commonwealth showed high BAC and dangerous driving as gross, wanton conduct. | Yes; evidence showed criminal negligence and reckless disregard. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299 (U.S. 1932) (two offenses require proof of different elements)
- Illinois v. Vitale, 447 U.S. 410 (U.S. 1980) (Blockburger test; separate elements matter for double jeopardy)
- Johnson v. Commonwealth, 38 Va.App. 137 (Va. Ct. App. 2002) (same evidence test; separate acts may sustain multiple offenses)
- Londono v. Commonwealth, 40 Va.App. 377 (Va. Ct. App. 2003) (acts, time, situs, victim, and nature distinguish offenses under §19.2-294)
- Phillips v. Commonwealth, 257 Va. 548 (Va. 1999) (prosecution definition; simultaneous vs. successive prosecution analysis)