State v. Irish
292 Neb. 513
| Neb. | 2016Background
- At ~12:55 a.m. on Feb. 9, 2014, Bryant L. Irish drove a pickup that failed to negotiate a curve, rolled, and ejected his passenger who suffered serious head injuries.
- Post‑accident blood test showed Irish’s BAC = .117.
- Parties stipulated passenger suffered statutory "serious bodily injury," Irish was driving, pickup showed signs of speeding (reconstructionist estimated minimum braking speed ~86.74 mph in a 45 mph zone), road had ice/snow patches, no seatbelts were worn, and front airbags did not deploy.
- Irish told officers he drank up to 10 beers and that the road was too icy to maneuver; an expert testified intoxication impairs judgment and was a factor along with speeding.
- The district court convicted Irish under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60‑6,198(1) (DUI causing serious bodily injury), finding impairment caused the accident and no efficient intervening cause existed; Irish appealed claiming the court should have applied a stricter "but for" causation standard (relying on Burrage).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Irish) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 60‑6,198(1) requires "but for" causation or proximate causation | Statute requires proximate causation; proximate causation includes "but for" as one element | Burrage requires the court to require strict "but for" causation (argues State’s proof insufficient) | Court held the statute requires proximate causation, which includes "but for" causation; Burrage not controlling here |
| Whether evidence proved causation beyond a reasonable doubt | Evidence (BAC, admission, reconstruction, expert testimony, circumstances) shows driving while intoxicated proximately caused injury | Multiple other factors (speed, ice, road work, lack of seatbelt, no lines) undermine "but for" causation | Court held a reasonable trier of fact could find "but for" and proximate causation; conviction supported |
Key Cases Cited
- Burrage v. U.S., 134 S. Ct. 881 (U.S. 2014) (interpreting statutory phrase "results from" to require but‑for causation in federal sentencing enhancement)
- Paroline v. U.S., 134 S. Ct. 1710 (U.S. 2014) (discussing causation concepts in criminal context)
- State v. Muro, 269 Neb. 703 (Neb. 2005) (proximate cause and causation principles)
- Amanda C. v. Case, 275 Neb. 757 (Neb. 2008) (elements and proof of proximate causation)
- State v. Sommers, 201 Neb. 809 (Neb. 1978) (definition and discussion of proximate cause)