Defendant drives an SUV with 4 kids (teenagers under 17) in the backseat, none are wearing seatbelts. There are 3 seatbelts in the backseat of this SUV, there is no 3rd row seat.

Defendant gets distracted, then realizes the vehicle is about to crash into another vehicle, so defendant oversteers, and loses control.

SUV rolls over and the kids are ejected from the backseat. One dies on scene, the rest are severely injured, but survive.

What would the manner and means charging language read like? The theory I'm thinking of pursuing is the seatbelt violation of 545.413 of the Transportation code, namely, allowing someone under 17 to ride without a seatbelt.

I was also thinking the facts raise other negligent behavior. Wouldn't the defendant be negligent to allow 4 people to ride in a vehicle with only 3 seatbelts? Or is this somehow a great defense, in that, defendant has no obligation to the kid who was ejected and died, because there wasn't an available seatbelt.

It also seems that driving while distracted can be criminally negligent. I'm not certain about this one, but I think the behavior fits not maintaining a proper lookout.


If you've dealt with a similar set of facts and have a good complaint or indictment, I'd love to see how to word the charge so I'm not stating too few or too many details that would need to be proved up down the road.

(I'm not an attorney) I had a crash I investigated that was ultimately charged as injury to a child with similar facts (child was 11 though) based on the failure to seatbelt. I can give you the case info if it would help

If the child is at least 15, doesn't the burden fall on them to seatbelt themselves? (they would be the ones cited, not the driver).

[This message was edited by bgreer on 09-13-11 at .]

These are really hard cases and Ill bet every jurisdiction has had them. There is a deceased victim's family wanting the Defendant to go to prison and the Prosecutor has to decide if the accident is criminal.

Don't you need to prove that the Defendant was criminally negligent in his driving? If he wasn't intoxicated or speeding and merely a lousy driver who had an accident would you want to charge him with crime?

We had a racing accident and death of an innocent third party. We charged criminally negligent homicide and the jury came back with a not guilty and a guilty to the Lesser charge of racing.

With all due respect, AF ... isn't your analysis backwards? It appears* that you're starting with the conclusion that this was a crime and then trying to work backwards to find a theory to establish it in court. It should work the other way around. If the bad acts aren't obvious up front, then maybe this case needs further evaluation on its merits.

Sometimes it's good to remember what a wise old hand once told me:

Not every bad act is a crime.
Not every SOB is a criminal.
That's why we have civil lawsuits.

* - This forum does not provide adequate space in which to lay out all the relevant factors of any particular case (like the exact ages of the victims, any special vulnerabilities they may've had, or the defendant's past history), nor should you do so here, so I won't throw stones without all the relevant information. Novel concept for the Internet, I know, but it's one I like to honor.

[This message was edited by Shannon Edmonds on 09-14-11 at .]

Thanks for the responses, we're taking a different approach now.