405 P.3d 892
Utah Ct. App.2017Background
- On the day of the crash Bill Robert Thompson sent sexually explicit texts to a woman hours before his wife confronted him; an argument and a domestic assault followed at home.
- Thompson, intoxicated (BAC .22), then drove a heavy, lifted pickup erratically through neighborhoods and on the freeway, deliberately accelerated into cars, and ran a red light at high speed.
- His truck plowed into multiple vehicles at the intersection, killing one passenger (Victim) and seriously injuring others including Victim’s daughter.
- Evidence at trial included video, vehicle airbag control module data showing the accelerator floored through impact, eyewitness testimony of aggressive driving and threats, and the pre-crash text messages.
- Thompson pleaded guilty to several DUI and misdemeanor charges; a jury convicted him of first-degree murder (depraved indifference) and two counts of aggravated assault. He appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of pre-crash text messages | Texts were relevant to Thompson’s mental state before the crash and why his wife confronted him; admissible. | Texts were irrelevant to mental state at time of crash, prejudicial and cumulative. | Admitted: texts were relevant to knowing mental state and probative value not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for depraved‑indifference murder (objective element) | Driving a heavy truck at freeway speeds through a red light into traffic without braking shows utter callousness to human life. | Driving (even while intoxicated) does not automatically equal depraved indifference given social utility of vehicles. | Sufficient: objective factors (speed, red light, failure to brake, magnitude of harm) supported depraved indifference. |
| Sufficiency of evidence for grave risk of death | The conduct (accelerating into busy intersection at high speed in a large truck) created a highly likely probability of death. | Statistical risk of drunk driving generally insufficient to establish the “highly likely” standard. | Sufficient: the specific manner/place of driving (massive vehicle, red light, speed) met grave‑risk standard. |
| Voluntary intoxication / mens rea (knowing element) | State: despite intoxication, evidence showed Thompson was aware of and controlled his conduct; intoxication did not negate knowing mental state. | Thompson: high BAC and signs of intoxication negated the required knowing mental state. | Sufficient evidence to disprove voluntary‑intoxication defense: actions before and during driving, text messages, maneuvers, and post‑crash behavior supported that he acted knowingly. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Standiford, 769 P.2d 254 (Utah 1988) (defines depraved indifference and objective standard for value of human life)
- State v. Bolsinger, 699 P.2d 1214 (Utah 1985) (lists factors for evaluating depraved indifference: utility, magnitude of risk, knowledge, precautions)
- State v. Cuttler, 367 P.3d 981 (Utah 2015) (standard of appellate review for evidentiary rulings)
- State v. Burke, 256 P.3d 1102 (Utah Ct. App. 2011) (voluntary intoxication instruction and limits of intoxication defense)