State v. Ridgway

Thomas Ridgway (defendant) was a 19-year-old father and worked as a painter. Ridgway was indicted for reckless driving that resulted in a 16-year-old boy’s death. The accident did not involve alcohol or drugs. Ridgway had no physical, psychological, or addiction problems and no criminal record. The state (plaintiff) denied Ridgway’s application for admission to the pretrial-intervention (PTI) program. Ridgway appealed. The court held that the state’s failure to consider Ridgway as an individual and its reliance on Ridgway’s driving record were an abuse of discretion. On remand, the state gave the following reasons for rejection: because the crime was not victimless, the nature of the offense did not support admission; because a police examination of the vehicle contradicted Ridgway’s claim that brake failure caused the accident, the facts of the case did not support admission; the victim’s family was opposed to PTI; Ridgway had no problems like drug or alcohol involvement that required PTI services; driver training was within the control of the Division of Motor Vehicles, which was not subject to a PTI order; society’s interest in prosecution to achieve deterrence outweighed Ridgway’s interest in PTI; no social problem would be exacerbated by prosecution; the harm to society if Ridgway were not prosecuted would outweigh any benefit PTI could provide; and rehabilitation was unnecessary because Ridgway refused to admit guilt and insisted the accident was caused by brake failure. Ridgway appealed.