State v. Hintz

102 P.2d 639, 61 Idaho 411, 1940 Ida. LEXIS 24
CourtIdaho Supreme Court
DecidedMay 4, 1940
DocketNo. 6759.
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 102 P.2d 639 (State v. Hintz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State v. Hintz, 102 P.2d 639, 61 Idaho 411, 1940 Ida. LEXIS 24 (Idaho 1940).

Opinion

MORGAN, J.

The charging part of the information in this ease is as follows:

“That the said Ó. A. Hintz, on or about the 15th day of January, 1939, and before the filing of this information at Pocatello, in the County of Bannock, State of Idaho, at a point on Highway No. 30 about three and one-half miles south of Pocatello, Bannock County, Idaho, then and there being, did then and there knowingly, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, at a point about three and one-half miles south of the city of Pocatello in the county of Bannock, in the State of Idaho, and at a point about two hundred and fifty feet north of the Owl Club on the 15th day of January, *414 1939, at about 3:15 A. M. of said day, and did then and there while engaged and occupied in running a motor vehicle, to-wit: A one and one-half ton Chevrolet truck, on the public highway of the State of Idaho, County of Bannock, and particularly on U. S. Highway No. 30 at the point above described, did unlawfully and feloniously park and cause to be parked said Chevrolet truck upon said highway at the point above described upon the pavement and main lane of traffic and without any lights thereon, and did then and there unlawfully and negligently and carelessly and without due caution by then and there failing to drive said motor vehicle off to the side of the road and left the same parked in such a manner and without lights as to endanger the lives and limbs of persons traveling upon and along said highway. That by reason of said negligent acts aforementioned and the lack of due caution of said defendant, O. A. Hintz, the said defendant did then and there by reason of leaving said truck parked upon the highway and without lights cause a collision with a car driven by R. E. Hopkins in which Margaret Louise Gates was a passenger and that by reason of said negligent parking of said truck upon said highway as aforesaid, said Margaret Louise Gates received mortal wounds from the effects of which she, the said Margaret Louise Gates, died within a few hours after the collision, on said 15th day of January, 1939, and that by reason of said acts as aforesaid the said O. A. Hintz, the defendant, did, in the manner and form aforesaid unlawfully and feloniously and without malice, kill the said Margaret Louise Gates and commit the crime of involuntary manslaughter. ’ ’

Appellant demurred to the information. The demurrer was overruled and he plead not guilty. Trial resulted in verdict and judgment of conviction of guilty of involuntary manslaughter. He moved in arrest of judgment and his motion was overruled. He moved for a new trial, which was denied. He appealed from the judgment of conviction and from the order denying a new trial.

Appellant assigns as error the orders overruling his demurrer to the information, overruling his motion in arrest of judgment, and denying him a new trial. He also contends the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict and judg *415 ment. The conclusion we have reached with respect to the last mentioned contention makes a discussion of the other assignments unnecessary.

The evidence shows, without dispute, that appellant was employed by Kewanee Coal Company, in Pocatello, to deliver coal to its customers; that he owned the truck, involved in the accident here under consideration, and used it in the course of his employment; that he roomed at the home of Mrs. Mattie Hawkins; that Saturday night, January 14, 1939, after his day’s work was done, he and Mrs. Hawkins took a ride in the truck, from Pocatello toward Inkom; that when they got near Inkom, about thirteen or fourteen miles from Pocatello, they turned back along the highway and stopped at the Owl Club; that they reached the Owl Club and parked the truck in front of it at about twelve o ’clock, midnight; that they remained at the Owl Club until near three o’clock A. M., when he and Mrs. Hawkins got into the truck and started back to Pocatello. Appellant was driving. When he got in the truck he turned on the lights and they were in good working condition. When he had proceeded about six hundred feet along the highway from the Owl Club, toward Pocatello, the engine began to sputter and jerk and stopped. He repeatedly stepped on the starter, in an effort to start the engine, but was unable to do so. ITe got out and felt the Avires, distributor and spark plugs. All were in place and apparently in good Avorking order. He again tried the starter but the engine Avould not keep going — just started and stopped. After numerous efforts to start the engine, appellant and Mrs. Hawkins attempted to push the truck from the paved portion of the highway and they testified they succeeded in removing it entirely from the pavement. Appellant testified that after the truck was removed from the pavement he again tried to start it but was unable to do so; that from ten to'fifteen minutes elapsed during which he was attempting to start the truck and in removing it from the highway. There is conflict in the evidence as to whether the truck’s lights were burning, during that time, and as to its exact position on the highway. Witnesses who passed the truck testified the lights Avere not burning and some of them tes *416 tified it was in the right-hand traffic lane of the highway, its left wheels being near the center line.

Dr. J. E. Bresee, a dentist residing in Pocatello, was returning from a dance at Inkom. The car in which he rodé, in the front seat with the driver, was the last to pass the truck before the wreck occurred. He was a witness, called by the state, and, on direct examination, testified:

“Well, when he was coming in, just this side of the Owl Club a short distance, I noticed there was a truck parked partially on the highway there, and as we came out of the lights of the Owl Club I noticed there was another person either by the truck, or here by this place there, — there was a point it was kind of hard to see along there, these shadows following the car, that is, from the lights from the Owl Club, and we just about reached that point; it seemed like this truck was setting there, and we had to swerve a little bit to get by it.
Q. “What part of the road was it setting on?
A. “It was on the right hand side of the road.
Q. “Now, what part of the right hand side?
A. “Well, I imagine the truck, as far as I could tell, was about half on the highway and half off.”

The evidence is undisputed that the paved portion of the highway, at this point, is twenty feet wide and that the shoulders, on each side of it are seven feet wide, making an improved road thirty-four feet in width. It also shows that for a considerable distance on each side of the point of collision the highway is straight and rises, from the Owl Club, northward toward Pocatello, a foot and two and a quarter inches in six hundred ten feet, and that the rise is gradual. While the truck was standing on the highway, as above described, a car containing four people who were returning to Pocatello from the dance at Inkom, traveling at a rate of from forty to fifty miles an hour, collided with it, resulting in the injury and death of Margaret Louise Gates, one of its occupants.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Haxforth v. State
786 P.2d 580 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1990)
Simons v. State
773 P.2d 1156 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1989)
State v. Curtis
680 P.2d 1383 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 1984)
State v. Padilla
620 P.2d 286 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1980)
State v. Brinton
433 P.2d 126 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1967)
State v. Long
423 P.2d 858 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1967)
People v. Rodriguez
186 Cal. App. 2d 433 (California Court of Appeal, 1960)
State v. Gummerson
310 P.2d 362 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1957)
State v. Davidson
309 P.2d 211 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1957)
State v. Wheeler
220 P.2d 687 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1950)
State v. Salhus
189 P.2d 372 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1948)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 P.2d 639, 61 Idaho 411, 1940 Ida. LEXIS 24, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hintz-idaho-1940.