CRAIG MOYE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Craig Moye was convicted of vehicular homicide by reckless driving after his vehicle struck and killed a 15-year-old boy riding his bicycle through an intersection. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, holding that sufficient evidence established reckless conduct under Florida law.
The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction. The trial court's findings of reckless conduct—including weaving in and out of traffic, accelerating through a red light when other vehicles stopped, and nearly striking another vehicle—met the legal standard of reckless conduct required under McCreary v. State.
[1] Evidence of weaving in and out of traffic, driving at or near the speed limit, and accelerating through a red light into a busy intersection is sufficient to support a ju…
[2] Reckless conduct in the context of vehicular homicide includes willfully disregarding traffic signals and endangering other motorists.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This offense was committed in a reckless, aggressive manner. The Defendant was weaving in and out of traffic, driving at or near the speed limit and willfully disregarded the yellow traffic signal as he approached a busy intersection. All other cars slowed and stopped at the signal, however, Defendant accelerated through the red light into the intersection.”
Trial court's summary of evidence establishing reckless conduct
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMoye was driving in traffic when he weaved in and out of lanes at or near the speed limit, disregarded a yellow traffic signal, and accelerated throug…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Vehicular Homicide cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm appellant’s conviction of vehicular homicide by reckless driving and reject his claim that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s finding of guilt.
Moye was charged with vehicular homicide as a result of his vehicle striking and killing a young boy. In its sentencing order the trial court summarized the proof presented at trial through the testimony of numerous witnesses:
This offense was committed in a reckless, aggressive manner. The Defendant was weaving in and out of traffic, driving at or near the speed limit and willfully disregarded the yellow traffic signal as he approached a busy intersection. All other cars slowed and stopped at the signal, however, Defendant accelerated through the red light into the intersection.
This offense was committed against persons and resulted in personal injury. Fifteen year old Sean Grinde was riding his bicycle across this intersection when the Defendant ran the red light. The Defendant’s car struck Sean, and knocked him off the bicycle and onto the hood of his car. Sean’s head broke the windshield and he was tossed onto the roadway. Sean died from the injuries he sustained as a result of Defendant’s actions.
The Defendant also endangered other motorists. One witness testified that the Defendant almost struck her vehicle as he was weaving between lanes.
We have reviewed the record and find the trial court’s conclusions supported by the evidence presented at trial. We agree with the state that the proof submitted here was sufficient to meet the legal standard of reckless conduct set out in McCreary v. State, 371 So. 2d 1024 (Fla.1979).
ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and OFTEDAL, RICHARD L., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Luzardo v. State, 147 So. 3d 1083 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…we find that the State established a prima facie case of recklessness on the part of the defendant-likely to cause the death of, or great bodily harm to another. McCreary v. State, 371 So. 2d 1024 (Fla.1979); D.E., 904 So. 2d at 563; Moye v. State, 571 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); see Michel v. State, 752 So. 2d at 6. As such, the recklessness issue is within the province of the jury and not subject to a motion to dismiss. State v. Sheppard, 401 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (recklessness and proximate c…
-
State v. Audria Diane Gensler, 929 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…e find that the State established a prima facie case of recklessness on the part of the defendant — likely to cause the death of, or great bodily harm to another. McCreary v. State, 371 So. 2d 1024 (Fla.1979); D.E., 904 So. 2d at 563; Moye v. State, 571 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); see Michel v. State, 752 So. 2d at 6. As such, the recklessness issue is within the province of the jury and not subject to a motion to dismiss. State v. Sheppard, 401 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)(recklessness and proximate ca…
Authorities Cited
- McCREARY v. State, 371 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1979)