Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appellate panel hears challenge to "zone of danger" evidence and six‑month jail term in Price case
Summary
An appellate court heard arguments over whether evidence sufficed to support a reckless‑endangerment conviction based on the "zone of danger" doctrine and whether a six‑month jail term within a two‑year sentence was excessive, with defense counsel arguing insufficient evidence and the state pointing to a second motorcycle and high speed.
An appellate panel heard oral argument over whether the evidence was sufficient to support a reckless‑endangerment conviction and a six‑month jail term imposed on defendant Mr. Price.
The issue central to the hearing was the so‑called "zone of danger" standard for reckless endangerment and whether testimony from Officer Mulligan and Lieutenant Springer established that other people were placed in imminent danger. Defense counsel argued the state’s evidence was insufficient; Ben Ball, attorney for the state, said testimony that two motorcycles were side by side and that one traveled well over the posted limit established the required risk.
Defense counsel (unnamed) told the panel, “This case really, I think, comes down to the, the zone of danger argument in…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
