People of Michigan v. Dalton Duane Carll
322 Mich. App. 690
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- On June 17, 2015, 17‑year‑old Dalton Duane Carll (licensed one month) drove a pickup with seven occupants on a gravel road, ran a visible stop sign, and collided with a car entering the intersection; the car driver died, three passengers in the car suffered serious injuries, and two occupants in the truck bed were seriously injured.
- Trial evidence included passenger estimates of speeds ranging from 30–60 mph, testimony that the driver did not brake and may have accelerated through the stop sign, and an accident‑reconstructionist’s opinion that impact speed was 30–43 mph and there were no braking marks on the gravel.
- Defendant testified he attempted to brake but experienced "spongy" brakes and that a rear brake line failed; a post‑crash inspection revealed a broken rear brake line.
- Prosecution called a mechanic, Greg Bittner, as an expert who testified the brake line was cleanly torn during the crash and that front and rear brakes operate on separate lines, so preexisting rear‑line failure would not explain total brake failure.
- A jury convicted Carll of one count of reckless driving causing death (MCL 257.626(4)) and three counts of reckless driving causing serious impairment (MCL 257.626(3)); the court imposed concurrent prison terms; defendant appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence to prove willful/wanton disregard | Jury could find defendant knowingly disregarded safety by speeding, not braking, and running the stop sign | Evidence insufficient; defendant claimed brake failure and lower speed, so only ordinary negligence | Affirmed — evidence (eyewitnesses, reconstruction) supported willful/wanton disregard beyond reasonable doubt |
| Admissibility/qualification of mechanic as expert (MRE 702) | Bittner had training, certifications, and extensive brake experience; his inspection and methodology were reliable | Trial court abused discretion; methodology unreliable and witness had not previously been qualified as an expert | Affirmed — trial court did not abuse discretion; Bittner sufficiently qualified and applied reliable principles |
| Ineffective assistance for not hiring/challenging mechanical expert | Counsel effectively cross‑examined Bittner and pursued reasonable strategy; a duplicate expert not necessarily required | Counsel was deficient for failing to retain a defense mechanical expert and for not undermining Bittner more vigorously | Affirmed — no deficient performance shown or prejudice established |
| Scoring of Offense Variable (OV) 13 at 25 points for pattern of criminal conduct | Multiple convictions and multiple victims justify OV 13 points | Single act (one crash) cannot constitute a continuing pattern of criminal behavior | Reversed on OV 13 — single felonious act cannot be a "pattern"; OV 13 should be scored at zero; case remanded for resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Nowack, 462 Mich. 392 (standard for sufficiency review in criminal cases)
- People v. Wolfe, 440 Mich. 508 (jury credibility/weight of evidence principles)
- People v. Crawford, 187 Mich. App. 344 (definition/requirement for willful and wanton disregard)
- People v. Petri, 279 Mich. App. 407 (expert testimony admissibility under MRE 702)
- People v. Christel, 449 Mich. 578 (criteria for qualifying an expert witness)
- Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (gatekeeping role for trial court regarding expert reliability)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)
- Harrington v. Richter, 562 U.S. 86 (deference to counsel’s reasonable strategic choices re experts)
- People v. Gibbs, 299 Mich. App. 473 (OV13 scoring when separate acts against multiple victims exist)
- People v. Harmon, 248 Mich. App. 522 (OV13 scoring where separate criminal acts occurred during the episode)