Sign Up for Vincent AI
Hightower v. State
Representing Appellant: Office of the State Public Defender: Diane M. Lozano, Wyoming Public Defender; Kirk Allan Morgan, Chief Appellate Counsel; David E. Westling, Senior Assistant Appellate Counsel. Argument by Mr. Westling.
Representing Appellee: Bridget L. Hill, Wyoming Attorney General; Jenny L. Craig, Deputy Attorney General; Joshua C. Eames, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Kellsie J. Singleton, Assistant General. Argument by Ms. Singleton.
Before DAVIS, C.J., and FOX, KAUTZ, BOOMGAARDEN, and GRAY, JJ.
[¶1] Tonya Hightower, a professional semi-trailer truck driver, was involved in a highway collision that resulted in a fatality. Ms. Hightower was subsequently tried by a jury and convicted of aggravated homicide by vehicle under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-106(b)(ii). On appeal, Ms. Hightower contends the district court erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to show she acted recklessly. We agree and reverse.
[¶2] The dispositive issue is:
Was the evidence sufficient for the jury to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Ms. Hightower acted recklessly?
[¶3] The State charged Ms. Hightower with one count of aggravated homicide by vehicle. The information stated that "Defendant operated or drove a vehicle in a reckless manner, and Defendant's conduct is the proximate cause of the death of another person, in violation of Wyoming Statute § 6-2-106(b)(ii) [.]" During a three day jury trial, the State theorized that Ms. Hightower fell asleep behind the wheel. It argued she acted in a reckless manner by consciously disregarding fatigue and presented evidence in accordance with this theory.
[¶4] The bulk of the State's evidence at trial came from the testimony of two Wyoming State Troopers. Trooper Dustin Ragon, who was first on the scene, has training and experience in law enforcement, crash investigation, and commercial carriers including logbooks, electronic logging devices, and commercial driver regulations. Trooper Tyler Matheney, who also responded to the scene and investigated the crash, testified as an expert witness in crash reconstruction.
[¶5] Accepting the State's evidence as true, the facts established at trial are as follows. Ms. Hightower was a professional semi-trailer truck driver with 22 years of experience. Ms. Hightower and her husband were team drivers, which meant they alternated driving the truck, "one sleeps, one drives."
[¶6] On March 21, 2018, Ms. Hightower was driving westbound on I-80 between Cheyenne and Laramie when her truck struck a sedan and killed the driver, Mr. Vidal Madera, who was on his way to work.
[¶7] Tread marks at the scene showed Ms. Hightower's truck veered left out of the westbound lane, crossed the median, and rolled over two sets of rumble strips before it entered the eastbound lanes and struck Mr. Madera's sedan. Trooper Matheney testified Ms. Hightower drove in the median for "a little more than seven seconds" before entering the eastbound lanes. The final resting place of the truck indicated it had continued across the eastbound lanes, over another rumble strip, up an embankment and through a fence before it came to rest on a small pile of rocks. Trooper Matheney said the evidence showed the truck came to an "uncontrolled rest," meaning it "came to rest [ ] unintentionally." Trooper Ragon testified the tread marks were over two football fields long and they showed no indication of braking, sliding or harsh steering. Trooper Matheney also testified the tread marks indicated the tires "freely" rolled the entire time—there was no skidding or sliding and "minimal, if any, steering input[.]"
[¶8] When Trooper Ragon arrived on the scene, he found the Hightowers inside their truck. Ms. Hightower had been driving, Mr. Hightower was in the sleeper berth. Trooper Ragon asked "Why did you hit that car?" Ms. Hightower responded "I hit a car?" He testified she did not seem impaired—she did seem to be in shock, but said she was okay. Trooper Ragon testified Ms. Hightower did not know what had happened, she said she "just remembered fighting for the steering wheel." He asked if she had possibly fallen asleep and she said "she didn't think that she fell asleep."
[¶9] Ms. Hightower was transported to the hospital where she told Trooper Ragon she had taken a hydrocodone and a promethazine nausea pill. Trooper Matheney also testified Ms. Hightower told him she took these medications, and she said she took them after the crash. Ms. Hightower consented to a blood draw1 at the hospital, and two separate tests came back negative for any controlled substances.
[¶10] Trooper Ragon requested the Hightowers’ driving logbooks for the previous 8 days. Ms. Hightower's logs showed she began driving at about 11 p.m. the night before the collision. She drove for about 1 hour and 41 minutes, entered the sleeper berth for 1 hour and 22 minutes, drove again for about another hour and then entered the sleeper berth again for 2 hours and 2 minutes. Ms. Hightower had been driving again for 11 minutes when the crash occurred. Trooper Ragon also testified he found potential logbook violations from the days before the collision where Ms. Hightower's and Mr. Hightower's logs did not match.2
[¶11] Additionally, the evidence showed the road conditions were clear and despite some snow in the median and on the roadsides, weather was not suspected to be a contributing factor to the crash. The crash investigation concluded there was no malfunction of Ms. Hightower's truck that contributed to the crash. And, prior to the crash, Ms. Hightower was driving with her cruise control set below the posted speed limit.
[¶12] After the jury heard this evidence, Ms. Hightower moved for judgment of acquittal arguing the evidence was too uncertain to show she acted recklessly. The court denied the motion and gave the case to the jury who found Ms. Hightower guilty. Ms. Hightower was sentenced to 10-20 years in prison.
[¶13] "[T]he standard of review for a denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal is the same as that used when an appeal claims insufficient evidence to convict because both challenge the sufficiency of the evidence." Kuebel v. State , 2019 WY 75, ¶ 26, 446 P.3d 179, 187 (Wyo. 2019) (citing Foltz v. State , 2017 WY 155, ¶ 10, 407 P.3d 398, 401 (Wyo. 2017) ). When applying this standard, "[w]e ‘accept as true the State's evidence and all reasonable inferences which can be drawn from it.’ " Id. ¶ 27, 446 P.3d at 187 (quoting Hyatt v. State , 2018 WY 84, ¶ 10, 422 P.3d 524, 527–28 (Wyo. 2018) ). We simply determine "whether any rational trier of fact could have found that the essential elements of a charged crime were proven beyond a reasonable doubt on the evidence presented." Morones v. State , 2020 WY 85, ¶ 8, 466 P.3d 300, 303 (Wyo. 2020) (quoting Gonzalez-Chavarria v. State , 2019 WY 100, ¶ 22, 449 P.3d 1094, 1099 (Wyo. 2019) ).
[¶14] Ms. Hightower was convicted of aggravated homicide by vehicle. The applicable statute states:
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-106(b)(ii) (LexisNexis 2019).
[¶15] Ms. Hightower argues the State failed to present sufficient evidence to prove she acted in a reckless manner. See id. According to Wyoming's Criminal Code:
A person acts recklessly when [s]he consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the harm [s]he is accused of causing will occur, and the harm results. The risk shall be of such nature and degree that disregarding it constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation[.]
Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-1-104(a)(ix) (LexisNexis 2019). "We have held that this definition applies to aggravated vehicular homicide cases." Barrowes v. State , 2017 WY 23, ¶ 17, 390 P.3d 1126, 1128 (Wyo. 2017) (citing Breazeale v. State , 2011 WY 10, ¶ 15, 245 P.3d 834, 839–40 (Wyo. 2011) ).
[¶16] The State thus had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms. Hightower acted recklessly—that she consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that her driving would cause the death of another. See Hereford v. State , 2015 WY 17, ¶ 14, 342 P.3d 1201, 1204 (Wyo. 2015) ; Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 6-2-106(b)(ii), 6-1-104(a)(ix) ; Barrowes , ¶¶ 27–30, 390 P.3d at 1131. Only upon the State's satisfaction of this burden could the jury reasonably conclude Ms. Hightower was guilty.
[¶17] In Barrowes we recognized the difficulty of determining recklessness in these types of cases and stated that such a determination "depends upon the facts of each case." Barrowes , ¶ 29, 390 P.3d at 1131. Mr. Barrowes, also a professional semi-trailer truck driver, was convicted of aggravated vehicular homicide after he struck and killed a man whose vehicle was broken down on the roadside. Id. ¶¶ 8–9, 390 P.3d at 1127. Though we acknowledged "[t]he jury could have gone either way," id. ¶ 30, 390 P.3d at 1131, we ultimately determined the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's conclusion that Mr. Barrowes acted recklessly because he admitted he consciously disregarded his fatigue and fell asleep while driving. Id. ¶ 27, 390 P.3d at 1127. This case is different.
[¶18] Ms. Hightower never admitted she was fatigued, let alone that she consciously disregarded any fatigue. Trooper Ragon testified that, immediately following the crash, "she didn't think that she fell asleep." The State therefore relies on the following evidence and testimony to support Ms. Hightower's conviction: evidence...
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialExperience vLex's unparalleled legal AI
Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Try vLex and Vincent AI for free
Start a free trialStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting