This entire case started with a tragic sequence of events. A guy is driving a van in Seattle, on a September morning in 2006. He is not drunk. He has not been taking any drugs. My guess is he was working or was driving to work. He was driving down the street in a southbound direction. It was a two way street, so traffic was coming at him in the other land in a northbound direction.
The guy needed to make a left turn, so he waited for all of the traffic to clear, or so he thought. What he didn't see was a lady on a bicycle proceeding in the northbound direction as well. As he started to make his left turn, she was crossing the street. He didn't see her until it was too late. Even though the lady was wearing a helmet, she suffered head injuries and died later that day. As he should have been, the driver was cited for failing to yield to oncoming traffic, a traffic citation, not a criminal act.
Over the next few months, King County looked into the possibility of filing criminal charges but decided against it. They have good Seattle traffic attorneys there, and they know that the legislature, several years ago, decriminalized traffic infractions (I say to make them easier to win and to save money on supplying attorneys to defendants) to make the process more efficient. The only possibility they really had was vehicular manslaughter, but that was ruled out because there was no evidence the driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the accident. So they passed.
But, the City of Seattle, in all of their infinite wisdom, didn't think it was good enough to just let people live with the horror that is being the negligent party in a traffic accident. They wanted to criminalize the accident is serious injury was involved. So they passed a new assault statute. And I'm pretty sure this was the first case that was filed under that statute. And there was good reason why.
Since the driver had a competent Seattle traffic lawyer, it was obvious from the outset that the statute was invalid. It clearly criminalized a traffic infraction, which was specifically prohibited by the Washington State Legislature. But, when a motion to dismiss was filed, the trial judge balked. So, it was appealed to King County District Court, where the law was held invalid, and the charges ordered dismissed. Not satisfied with that, the City appealed it up to the Court of Appeals, which issued their ruling on the case on Monday. You can read the opinion here.
In a nutshell, this is what the Court of Appeals had to say:
Yielding the right of way is an act required by Title 46; or stated alternatively, turning left in front of a bicycle or other type of vehicle is an act prohibited by Title 46. However stated, Wilson's act -- whatever its consequence -- is only a traffic infraction under state law unless accompanied by the additional elements that would make it vehicular assault or vehicular homicide or driving while intoxicated or one of the other criminal offenses recognized in the exceptions under RCW 46.63.020. Seattle cannot classify failure to yield the right of way as a criminal offense merely by defining the "act" in a way that encompasses a particular result of the act.Result? Law struck down. Driver released. Case closed.
But you should take this as a warning if you drive a vehicle in Seattle or anywhere else. If you get in trouble, don't wait to hire a good Seattle criminal attorney or a good Seattle traffic lawyer. Having legal representation can make a huge difference in your case. If nothing else, you should at least consult with a lawyer before making any decisions. At least then you will know your options and the consequences you face.
Related Posts:
Seattle Traffic Lawyer | How to Beat a DUI
Seattle Traffic Lawyer | How to Beat a Ticket
