HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-1901-2006
COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
V. :
:
:
DANIEL JOSEPH SCHMOHL : CP-21-CR-1901-2006
IN RE: PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Bayley, J., June 22, 2007:--
1
Defendant, Daniel Joseph Schmohl, is charged with driving under the influence,
2
aggravated assault by vehicle while driving under the influence, recklessly
34
endangering another person, and reckless driving. He filed a motion for a writ of
habeas corpus to the counts of aggravated assault by vehicle while driving under the
influence, recklessly endangering another person, and reckless driving. A hearing was
conducted on June 21, 2007.
Evidence was presented that on March 30, 2006, three young men, Raymon
Deihl, Brant Cromer and Kyle Myers, were walking in the dark at approximately 9:00
p.m. along the right side of a long straight stretch of Sandbank Road in Cumberland
__________
1
75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(a)(1) and (b).
2
75 Pa.C.S. § 3735.1.
3
18 Pa.C.S. § 2705.
4
75 Pa.C.S. § 3736(a).
CP-21-CR-1901-2006
County. Raymon Deihl was walking in the grass, Kyle Myers was walking behind him,
and Brant Cromer was walking about four inches to the left of Diehl which would put
him close to the right hand fog line. Defendant was operating a Chevrolet Blazer
approaching the back of the three men. The right front of the Blazer struck Cromer with
a force sufficient to leave his sneaker on the road, just to the left of the fog line.
Cromer was propelled into the windshield of the Blazer and subsequently landed in a
field on the right of the road approximately 101 feet from the point of impact. He
suffered serious bodily injury. Defendant stopped approximately 440 feet from the point
of impact. Defendant told the Pennsylvania State Trooper at the scene that he struck
the victim but he did not realize it until after it happened. The blood alcohol content of
defendant at 10:42 p.m. was .128.
The elements of aggravated assault by vehicle while driving under the influence
are that defendant while driving under the influence negligently caused serious bodily
injury to another person. Negligence is a separate element of the offense along with
Commonwealth v. Miller,
driving under the influence. See 810 A.2d 178 (Pa. Super.
Commonwealth v. Mastromatteo,
2002); 719 A.2d 1081 (Pa. Super. 1998). A person
acts negligently when he should know of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his
conduct will cause serious bodily injury. The risk must be of such a nature and degree
that the defendant’s failure to perceive it, considering the nature and intent of
defendant’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, involves a gross deviation
from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the defendant’s
-2-
CP-21-CR-1901-2006
situation.
As to recklessly endangering another person, a person acts recklessly in
endangering another person with respect to serious bodily injury if he consciously
disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that serious bodily injury will result from
his conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that considering the nature
and intent of defendant’s conduct and the circumstances known to him, its disregard
involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would
observe in defendant’s situation. The offense of reckless driving requires driving in
willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property, which is synonymous
Commonwealth
with a conscious disregard for the safety of persons or property. See
v. Bullick,
830 A.2d 998 (Pa. Super. 2003).
The evidence of the failure of defendant to see the victim Cromer along the right
side of Sandbank Road, thus failing to perceive the risk of striking him, and then
striking him with such force as to propel him into the windshield with his body winding
up in a field on the right side of the road approximately 101 feet from the point of
impact, and to then stop approximately 440 feet from the point of impact not realizing
that he struck the victim until after it happened, constitutes sufficient evidence of the
elements of criminal negligence, reckless conduct and the conscious disregard for the
safety of another sufficient for a prima facie case of aggravated assault by a vehicle
while driving under the influence, recklessly endangering another person, and reckless
driving.
-3-
CP-21-CR-1901-2006
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of June, 2007, the petition of defendant for a writ
IS DENIED.
of habeas corpus,
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Matthew Smith, Esquire
For the Commonwealth
Michael O. Palermo, Jr., Esquire
For Defendant
:sal
-4-
COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
: OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
:
V. :
:
:
DANIEL JOSEPH SCHMOHL : CP-21-CR-1901-2006
IN RE: PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of June, 2007, the petition of defendant for a writ
IS DENIED.
of habeas corpus,
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Matthew Smith, Esquire
For the Commonwealth
Michael O. Palermo, Jr., Esquire
For Defendant
:sal