Distracted driver faces felony charge
Cherish Carlin’s eyes left the road for a mere two seconds. That’s how long it took to check her car’s GPS device as she searched for a spot to buy lunch.
But that momentary distraction might be enough to send the 20-year-old woman to prison for up to 15 years.
Carlin is in trouble because she ran down Professor Bradford Greene outside Dummerston, Vermont, in the early afternoon of April 18, 2009.
Professor Greene was riding his bike on the shoulder of Route 5 when Carlin’s vehicle approached from behind at between forty and fifty miles per hour.
Another driver said he saw Carlin’s car swerve sharply into the shoulder of the road and hit Professor Greene. According to the witness, Carlin’s car left the travel lane for approximately one or two seconds before hitting the cyclist.
At the scene, Carlin explained to police that she was trying to find a place to eat and looked down at her GPS device. When she looked up, she saw Professor Greene directly in front of her and couldn’t avoid hitting him.
Greene sustained life-threatening injuries and needed to be airlifted to Baystate Medical Center. The professor is currently recovering from severe head, chest and rib injuries that necessitated 13 blood transfusions in the days following the accident.
Carlin was charged with grossly negligent operation of a vehicle. Under Vermont law, a violation that involves bodily injury can mean up to 15 years in prison.
A state judge concluded that Carlin’s looking down at the GPS unit was a momentary distraction that didn’t amount to gross negligence, so the charge was dismissed.
But last week the Vermont Supreme Court reinstated the felony charge, concluding that there was sufficient evidence of gross negligence for the case to go to a jury.
“Although this is a close case, the State presented more evidence in support of the gross negligence charge than defendant’s two seconds of inattention. Defendant here was driving on a straight stretch of road in which the bicyclist would have been clearly visible prior to the accident. Indeed, the driver directly behind defendant’s vehicle testified that he observed the bicyclist well before the accident.
“The essential question becomes whether defendant’s decision to take her eyes off the road at a time when the risk of danger was heightened because of the presence of a bicyclist amounted to ‘a gross deviation from the care that a reasonable person would have exercised in that situation,’” the court said. (Vermont v. Carlin)
- Pat Murphy
