legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P v. LAUGHLIN

P v. LAUGHLIN
03:27:2006


P v. LAUGHLIN

Filed 3/21/06



CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION





IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA




FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT











THE PEOPLE,


Plaintiff and Respondent,


v.


JOHNNY HOWARD LAUGHLIN,


Defendant and Appellant.




F047242



(Super. Ct. No. TF004334A)





OPINION



APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Craig G. Phillips, Judge.


Matthew Alger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.


Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen G. Herndon, Harry Joseph Colombo and Alison Elle Aleman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Defendant Johnny Howard Laughlin was convicted by jury of driving with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property while fleeing from pursuing peace officers in violation of Vehicle Code section 2800.2.[1] In addition, the trial court found that defendant had suffered three prior prison terms. He appeals, claiming the Legislature's addition of subdivision (b) to section 2800.2 created an unconstitutional mandatory presumption by allowing a finding of willful or wanton disregard based solely on a finding the defendant committed three traffic offenses resulting in violation points, thus relieving the prosecution of its burden of proving willful or wanton disregard. We determine that subdivision (b) does not create an impermissible mandatory presumption. Instead, the statute provides a definition of substantive law.


FACTS


California Highway Patrol officer Jose Meza was on duty, in uniform, driving his marked patrol car when he saw defendant driving a vehicle without wearing his seatbelt. Officer Meza positioned himself behind defendant's vehicle and activated his lights. Instead of stopping, defendant drove away.


Officer Meza activated more lights and put his siren on. Defendant continued to evade Meza. Defendant failed to stop at numerous stop signs, drove through a red traffic light, and exceeded the speed limit. At the stop lights, drivers in the area were forced to take evasive action.


Defendant drove his vehicle off the road onto a private dirt road. Meza had a difficult time following him because of reduced visibility and the roughness of the terrain. California Highway Patrol officer Joseph Janzen joined in the pursuit of defendant. Defendant returned to the public road. He drove through another intersection with a stop sign without stopping. There were children in the area.


Defendant again drove off the public road into a dirt area. Neither Janzen nor Meza was able to follow him. Deputy Sheriff Mark Skidmore was driving a four-wheel-drive vehicle and began looking for defendant and his vehicle. Skidmore found defendant's truck. A police dog found defendant hiding in the bushes near his vehicle, where officers arrested him.


DISCUSSION


I. Characterization of Section 2800.2, Subdivision (b)


Section 2800.2 defines the crime of driving in a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property while fleeing from a pursuing peace officer. In 1996, subdivision (b) was added to this section.


Section 2800.2 provides: â€





Description Decision affirming a conviction for driving with a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property while fleeing from pursuing peace officers.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale