Sleep-Deprivation Leads to Santa Clara County Vehicular Manslaughter Charges

Nine months ago, a Palo Alto man was driving home with his four children after an all-night shopping spree for Black Friday 2012.  Tragically, the man dozed off behind the wheel, hit a CHP cruiser that was parked on the shoulder, and flipped over.  Tragically, two of his daughters were killed.  On August 22, 2013, the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s Office filed charges against the man stemming from his daughters’ deaths pursuant to Penal Code section 192(c) (Vehicular Manslaughter).     

California Penal Code section 192 defines three kinds of manslaughter:

1. Voluntary [Penal Code Section 192(a)] – People have a sudden quarrel or exhibit Heat of Passion;
2. Involuntary [Penal Code Section 192(b)] – Committing a misdemeanor or even a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner or with gross negligence.
3. Vehicular [Penal Code Section 192(c)] – Vehicular manslaughter can be charged when a driver commits a misdemeanor that results in death but without gross negligence. Or the driver is performing a lawful act  - without gross negligence – that could produce death.

If a driver is going at an extreme speed for current conditions, and is determined to be putting others on the road at risk, the District Attorney’s Office could charge a vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence.  Gross negligence in a vehicular manslaughter case occurs when the driver's actions show a reckless disregard for the safety of others around him.

The prosecutor for the “Black Friday” case theory charged vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence because the sleep-deprived driver fell asleep at the wheel while returning from the “open-all-night” or 4AM opening for Black Friday shopping on the day after Thanksgiving. 

Black Friday has been a boon for retailers to kick off the Holiday shopping season.  It’s even considered something that bored families who have come together for Thanksgiving holiday may do together.  Proving a “sleep-deprived” theory is difficult for the District Attorney’s Office, since ultimately it must show the driver committed an act that might produce death.  

Many students and workers drive while sleep-deprived.  While doing so is unquestionably dangerous, charging a father with vehicular manslaughter – who has already lost two of his children in a tragic accident – is extreme. 

This incident is tragic for everyone.  However, Penal Code section 192(c) requires the driver’s conduct to be an act which “might produce death”.  Driving a car MIGHT produce death in MANY circumstances.  There are many tragedies involving careful drivers who have been involved in tragic accidents. 

As written, Penal Code section 192(c) gives prosecutors broad discretion in charging vehicle-involved manslaughters.  However, sometimes an accident – no matter how tragic — is a horrible combination of circumstances which would not have occurred if you remove any single cause.  I think the decision to add to the tragedy of this father by criminal charges for sleep-deprived driving is regrettable.  Perhaps the jury will do the right thing.

If you or someone you know is accused of a crime, arrested, or contacted by police, contact San Jose criminal defense attorney Maureen Baldwin at (408) 279-4450 to learn your options today!