Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vehicular Homicide topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers Hear Calls to Let Prosecutors Seek Felonies in Deadly Distracted- driving Cases
Summary
Witnesses, prosecutors and law enforcement told a Judiciary committee there's a gap between misdemeanor vehicular homicide and felony aggravated homicide that can leave families feeling shortchanged; several asked lawmakers to let aggravating behaviors'from texting to repeat DUIs'be used to elevate charges.
A legislative Judiciary committee heard emotional testimony and technical legal perspectives on proposals to let prosecutors seek felony charges in more vehicular homicide cases, focusing on distracted driving and repeat dangerous drivers.
"She got a life sentence. He's getting 60 days," Kate Gladen told the committee on behalf of her family, describing the May 28 crash in Sheridan that killed her mother and the driver's prior driving record. Gladen urged the panel to give prosecutors discretion to escalate vehicular homicide to a felony when aggravating factors such as prior DUIs, SR-22 designation or the death of a person in a marked crosswalk are documented.
The committee first heard a statutory overview from Mr. Fuller, who summarized existing statutes on homicide by vehicle (6-2-106) and driving under the influence law (315233), and explained that aggravated homicide currently hinges on proof of "reckless" conduct or DUI-related elements. Laramie County District Attorney Sylvia Hackle told lawmakers prosecutors generally support more prosecutorial options but cautioned drafters to avoid language that would be unworkable in court.
"We all think that there are indeed times that the conduct which fits the statutory definition of negligent should be charged as a felony," Hackle said, adding that prosecution depends on evidence and precise statutory language.
Public-safety advocates and law enforcement pressed for clarity. Mike Cusk, representing a road-safety group, cited studies showing texting increases crash risk six to eight times versus roughly four times for a .08 BAC DUI and recommended that "distracted driving, texting or phone use that causes death" be an aggravator. Alan Thompson of the Wyoming Association of Sheriffs and Chiefs of Police and Lt. Col. Carl Germaine of the Wyoming Highway Patrol urged careful drafting so officers and prosecutors could gather and preserve phone evidence and so statutes map to provable elements.
Committee members asked whether judges can already consider prior driving history at sentencing; Hackle said judges can consider prior convictions during sentencing even if the charge is a misdemeanor, but she agreed that giving prosecutors a felony option at charging stage changes plea bargaining and case options for families.
No formal bill was adopted at the hearing. Committee members asked legislative staff to draft several approaches for future consideration: (a) specifying discrete aggravating factors (texting while driving, driving on suspended/revoked license, prior DUI or reckless convictions, death of a vulnerable road user in a marked crosswalk), (b) clarifying the definition of "reckless" within the vehicular-homicide statute or listing qualifying behaviors, and (c) further study of how phone and other electronic evidence can be preserved for prosecution. The committee emphasized careful wording to avoid inadvertently narrowing prosecutorial discretion or creating evidentiary traps.
Next steps: staff were asked to prepare draft statutory options tied to the listed aggravators while retaining the existing reckless standard for comparison. The committee indicated it will review those drafts at a later interim meeting before deciding whether to sponsor legislation.
