People v. Roque CA5
F080242
| Cal. Ct. App. | Apr 27, 2022Background
- Samantha Roque drove on Highway 41 at night, veered into oncoming traffic and collided with a northbound RAV4; a 10-year-old passenger (M.M.) died from blunt head trauma.
- CHP detected signs of intoxication; Roque refused a PAS breath test at the scene and later registered blood-alcohol results averaging 0.189% (expert estimated ≈0.22% at time of crash).
- Accident investigation showed the Dodge (Roque) had entered the northbound lane; the RAV4’s rear seat occupants (including M.M.) were unbelted and a right-rear belt may have been inoperable.
- Jury convicted Roque of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated (Pen. Code § 191.5(a)); she was sentenced to the six-year middle term and ordered to pay fines/assessments.
- On appeal Roque argued (1) insufficient evidence of gross negligence, (2) erroneous exclusion of seatbelt evidence, (3) abuse of discretion in denying probation and selecting the middle term, and (4) constitutional error in imposing fines/assessments without an ability-to-pay hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Roque) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence of gross negligence | BAC > .18/.22, failed field sobriety tests, drove 30 min at night on highway and entered oncoming lane — supports gross negligence. | Conduct did not rise above ordinary negligence; no other traffic violations or extreme driving behavior; death partly caused by victim not wearing a seatbelt. | Affirmed — substantial evidence supports gross negligence based on very high BAC, decision to drive that distance at night, and resulting entry into oncoming lane causing fatality. |
| Exclusion of evidence that victim was unbelted | Seatbelt status irrelevant to defendant’s causation and gross negligence; typical third‑party/victim omissions not superseding causes. | Seatbelt evidence relevant to causation, degree of negligence, impeachment of witnesses, and constitutional right to present a defense. | Affirmed — exclusion proper as lack of seatbelt is absence of a protective force and not an intervening/superseding cause; evidence not relevant to gross negligence and defense forfeited argument about using it for credibility. |
| Denial of probation and selection of six‑year middle term | Court properly weighed aggravating (high BAC, child victim, emotional harm, lack of remorse) and mitigating factors. | Roque had no criminal history, had served custody pretrial, and incarceration unduly harsh; child’s seatbelt failure was contributing cause. | Affirmed — no abuse of discretion in denying probation or selecting middle term; victim’s young age permissible aggravating factor and court reasonably weighed mitigating factors. |
| Imposition of $300 restitution fine and $70 assessments without ability‑to‑pay hearing | Assessments and fine lawful; defendant forfeited Dueñas-based objection by not objecting at sentencing; counsel’s failure to object not shown ineffective. | Imposition violated Dueñas/Son line — required ability‑to‑pay hearing; request to vacate and remand for such hearing. | Affirmed — claim forfeited (Dueñas was available pre‑sentencing); ineffective assistance not shown because a plausible tactical reason existed and record does not establish inability to pay. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Bennett, 54 Cal.3d 1032 (Cal. 1991) (gross negligence defined as conscious indifference; intoxication level is part of the test)
- People v. Ochoa, 6 Cal.4th 1199 (Cal. 1993) (high BAC plus erratic, dangerous driving supports gross negligence)
- People v. Von Staden, 195 Cal.App.3d 1423 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987) (very high BAC and excessive speed support gross negligence)
- People v. Autry, 37 Cal.App.4th 351 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995) (failure of third parties to take protective measures is not an intervening superseding cause)
- People v. Wattier, 51 Cal.App.4th 948 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) (victim’s lack of seatbelt not an intervening cause and therefore irrelevant to criminal liability)
- People v. McGee, 31 Cal.2d 229 (Cal. 1947) (surgical delay after wounding not an intervening superseding cause relieving defendant)
- People v. Sanchez, 26 Cal.4th 834 (Cal. 2001) (proximate causation and superseding‑cause principles in criminal law)
- People v. Cervantes, 26 Cal.4th 860 (Cal. 2001) (contributory negligence of victim does not absolve defendant absent superseding cause)
- People v. Dueñas, 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (assessments and fines may require an ability‑to‑pay inquiry under due process; generated circuit split)
- People v. Son, 49 Cal.App.5th 565 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020) (divided panel addressing scope of Dueñas; remand for ability‑to‑pay record in some circumstances)