People v. Ochoa

Alberto Ochoa (defendant) was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol. Ochoa attended a court-ordered class about the dangers of driving while intoxicated. While on probation from this conviction, Ochoa consumed 17 to 22 beers while at a relative’s home and fell asleep for a disputed amount of time. Ochoa then got into his vehicle and began to drive home. Around 1:50 a.m., witnesses saw Ochoa driving on a freeway at 10 to 15 miles per hour over the speed limit, repeatedly driving in and out of neighboring lanes without using a signal. Ochoa hit the back end of another car, causing an accident that killed both occupants of the other car. Blood tests taken after Ochoa’s arrest indicated that his blood alcohol content was likely around 0.15 at the time of the accident, which was above the legal limit for safe driving. Ochoa was charged with several crimes, including two charges of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. Among other elements, the gross-vehicular-manslaughter charges required showing that Ochoa had acted with gross negligence. Ochoa had acted with gross negligence if he had been aware of the consequences of his actions but was indifferent about those risks when he acted. To show that Ochoa had been aware of the risks when he drove that night, the prosecution presented evidence of Ochoa’s prior conviction for driving under the influence, his probation status, and his attendance at the alcohol-awareness class. Ochoa was convicted. On appeal, Ochoa argued that the prosecution had presented insufficient evidence to support a finding that he had acted with gross negligence. The appellate court found there was insufficient evidence of gross negligence, vacated the gross-vehicular-manslaughter convictions, and remanded the case to sentence Ochoa for the lesser offense of simple vehicular manslaughter. The California Supreme Court agreed to review the matter.