People v. Gomez

McCOMB, J. From judgments of guilty on two counts of negligent homicide (section 500 of the Vehicle Code) after trial before the court without a jury, defendant appeals. There are also appeals from the orders denying his motions for a new trial.

The evidence being viewed in the light most favorable to the People (respondent), and pursuant to the rules set forth in People v. Pianezzi, 42 Cal.App.2d 270, 277 [108 P.2d 685], the essential facts are:

About midnight of December 14, 1942, defendant was driving an automobile at approximately 40 miles per hour in a northerly direction on Mission Boad in Los Angeles. Biding in the automobile with him were four other persons including Mr. Befugio Salazar. When defendant arrived at the intersection of Mission Boad and Sichel Street he observed an automobile which was being driven by Mr. Alfieri, and in which Mrs. Alfieri was also riding, traveling in a southerly direction on Mission Boad about half a block north of the intersection just mentioned. At this time a third car was traveling in a northerly direction on Mission Boad approximately 100 feet in front of the automobile which defendant was driving. The last mentioned car passed the automobile in which Mr. and Mrs. Alfieri were riding. After which, and when about 15 feet from the Alfieris’ automobile, defendant without warning drove his automobile across the center line of Mission Boad on to the west half of the thoroughfare causing a head-on collision between the car he was driving and the automobile operated by Mr. Alfieri. When the accident occurred Mr. Alfieri was driving between 25 and 30 miles per hour. At the point of the accident (approximately [419]half-way between two intersecting cross streets) Mission Road was 54 feet from curb to curb. Defendant admitted that prior to the collision he had consumed four glasses of beer. Both Mr. Salazar and Mrs. Alfieri received injuries in the accident from which they died.

Defendant relies for reversal of the judgments on this proposition:

There is not any substantial evidence to sustain the trial court’s finding that decedents died as the proximate result of injuries caused by defendant’s driving an automobile “with reckless disregard of, or wilful indifference to the safety of others.”

This proposition is untenable and is governed by the following pertinent rules:

(1) The phrase “with reckless disregard of the safety of others” as used in section 500 of the Vehicle Code means thfe intentional doing of an act with wanton and reckless disregard of the possible result. (People v. Young, 20 Cal.2d 832, 837 [129 P.2d 353].)