Legal Topics

Criminal law — Traffic infractions — Reckless driving — Partial judgment of acquittal is granted as to charge of reckless driving at time of crash — Although there is evidence that defendant was speeding and swerving among vehicles prior to crash, there is no evidence of anything beyond speeding at time of crash, and speeding alone is legally insufficient to be reckless driving

Jul 18th, 2025 in by admin

Criminal law — Traffic infractions — Reckless driving — Partial judgment of acquittal is granted as to charge of reckless driving at time of crash — Although there is evidence that defendant was speeding and swerving among vehicles prior to crash, there is no evidence of anything beyond speeding at time of crash, and speeding alone is legally insufficient to be reckless driving

STATE OF FLORIDA, Plaintiff, v. ELIJAH DANIEL DICKHAUS, Defendant. County Court, 8th Judicial Circuit in and for Alachua County. Case No. 01-2025-CT-000044-A. Division I. April 11, 2025. Meshon T. Rawls, Judge. Counsel: Mark Dobo and David Margulies, State Attorney’s Office, Gainesville, for Plaintiff. Andrew W. McCain and Caleb S. Kenyon, Turner O’Connor Kozlowski, P.L., Gainesville, for Defendant.ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTIONFOR PARTIAL JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL

THIS CAUSE is before this Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Partial Judgment of Acquittal. The Court, after reviewing the file and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, finds the following:

1. The motion is GRANTED.

2. The Court, in viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the State finds that the State proved that Mr. Dickhaus did drive recklessly in driving at an excessively high speed, 169 miles per hour, and by swerving between multiple cars, as was testified to by Ms. Ashcraft.

3. However, even in viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the Court finds that the State failed to establish a prima facie case that Mr. Dickhaus drove recklessly at the time relevant to the crash. No witness testified and no evidence showed that Mr. Dickhaus engaged in anything beyond excessive speeding at the time of the crash resulting in property damage and injury. The State’s expert witness, Corporal Hughes testified that any swerving prior to the crash could not have contributed to the crash. The Court therefore finds that the State failed to prove that the recklessness caused either personal injury or property damage.

4. Therefore, even viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the only evidence contributing to the crash was speeding, which is legally insufficient to be reckless driving. See Miller v. State, 636 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (holding that “excessive speed alone is insufficient to constitute evidence of reckless driving”). See also Harris v. State, 318 So. 3d 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) [46 Fla. L. Weekly D1070b] (reversing the defendant’s violation of probation when the evidence showed the defendant was driving ”more than fifty mph over the speed limit,” “on a four-lane road with a median in a mostly residential area. . . . He was driving during the day without evidence of swerving within his lane, without evidence of weaving outside his lane.”).

5. Because the remaining lesser included offenses are now the same, and Reckless Driving is a continuing offense, double jeopardy prevents both counts from being submitted to the jury.

6. The jury will receive a verdict with a single count of reckless driving.