J. S38014/16

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

v. :

:

COY D. TUTT, : No. 3293 EDA 2015

:

 Appellant :

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, August 12, 2015,

in the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County

Criminal Division at No. CP-48-SA-0000289-2014

BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., OLSON AND JENKINS, JJ. 

MEMORANDUM BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED JUNE 07, 2016

Coy D. Tutt appeals the August 12, 2015 judgment of sentence of the 

Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County that fined him $250 plus 

costs for violating Section 3714 of the Vehicle Code, careless driving--

unintentional death, 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3714, and $25 plus costs for violating 

Section 3322 of the Vehicle Code, vehicles turning left, 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3322. 

Appellant was initially convicted by a magisterial district judge. He then 

appealed to the trial court which conducted a trial de novo.

The facts as recounted by the trial court are as follows:

[O]n or about June 2, 2014, at approximately 

4 p.m., [appellant] was operating a tractor trailer 

eastbound on Silvercrest Road. [Appellant] was in 

the center lane of the three lane roadway, 

attempting to turn left (north). The weather 

conditions were clear and sunny. Simultaneously, a 

motorcycle operated by the decedent, Nicolas Aronis 
J. S38014/16

- 2 -

[(“Aronis”)], was traveling westbound on Silvercrest 

Road. Video footage showing the interior of 

[appellant’s] truck cab, as well as through the 

windshield of the truck, show [appellant] begin 

making the left turn without looking for oncoming 

traffic. [Appellant] had papers in his hands. Further 

testimony demonstrated that [appellant] was 

attempting to turn into the wrong address. As a 

result of the collision between the truck and the 

motorcycle, Mr. Aronis died at the scene. Thus, the 

evidence was clearly sufficient to sustain the guilty 

verdicts for both charges.

Trial court opinion, 12/30/15 at 2 (citations to record omitted).

Appellant raises the following issues for this court’s review:

1. Whether the evidence was insufficient to 

support a finding that [appellant] possessed 

the mens rea necessary to support a 

conviction for careless driving unintentionally 

causing the death of another person, Title 75 

Pa.C.S.A. § 3714(B)?

2. Whether the evidence was insufficient to 

support the conviction for careless driving 

unintentionally causing the death of another 

person, 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3714(B)?

3. Whether the evidence was insufficient to prove 

beyond a reasonable doubt that your 

[appellant] unintentionally caused the death of 

another person where no autopsy was 

performed on the victim by the Northampton 

County Coroner’s Office?

4. Whether the evidence was insufficient to 

support a finding that [appellant] initiated a 

turn where there was no vehicle “so close as to 

constitute a hazard in violation of vehicle 

turning left”, Title 75 Pa.C.S.A. §3322?

Appellant’s brief at 3 (capitalization omitted).
J. S38014/16

- 3 -

A claim challenging the sufficiency of the 

evidence is a question of law. Commonwealth v. 

Widmer, 560 Pa. 308, 319, 744 A.2d 745, 751 

(2000). In that case, our Supreme Court set forth 

the sufficiency of the evidence standard:

Evidence will be deemed sufficient to 

support the verdict when it establishes 

each material element of the crime 

charged and the commission thereof by 

the accused, beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Commonwealth v. Karkaria, 533 Pa. 

412, 625 A.2d 1167 (1993). Where the 

evidence offered to support the verdict is 

in contradiction to the physical facts, in 

contravention to human experience and 

the laws of nature, then the evidence is 

insufficient as a matter of law. 

Commonwealth v. Santana, 460 Pa. 

482, 333 A.2d 876 (1975). When 

reviewing a sufficiency claim the court is 

required to view the evidence in the light 

most favorable to the verdict winner 

giving the prosecution the benefit of all 

reasonable inferences to be drawn from 

the evidence. Commonwealth v. 

Chambers, 528 Pa. 558, 599 A.2d 630 

(1991).

Id. at 319, 744 A.2d at 751.

Commonwealth v. Morgan, 913 A.2d 906, 910 (Pa.Super. 2006).

Section 3714 of the Vehicle Code, entitled “Careless driving,” provides 

in pertinent part:

(a) General rule.--Any person who drives a 

vehicle in careless disregard for the safety of 

persons or property is guilty of careless 

driving, a summary offense.

(b) Unintentional death.--If the person who 

violates this section unintentionally causes the 
J. S38014/16

- 4 -

death of another person as a result of the 

violation, the person shall upon conviction, be 

sentenced to pay a fine of $500.

75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3714.

Initially, appellant contends that while his conduct constituted criminal 

negligence, it did not rise to the level of careless disregard for the safety of 

persons or property as required by the Vehicle Code.

“Careless disregard” is not defined in the Vehicle Code. See 

Commonwealth v. Wood, 475 A.2d 834, 836 (Pa.Super. 1984). In 

Commonwealth v. Gezovich, 7 A.3d 300, 301 (Pa.Super. 2010), this court 

stated that the term “careless disregard” implied less than willful or wanton 

conduct but implied more than ordinary negligence or the absence of care. 

Here, Pennsylvania State Trooper Christopher Maner 

(“Trooper Maner”) testified that he was dispatched to the crash involving 

appellant and Nicolas Aronis. As part of his investigation, Trooper Maner 

obtained a copy of the video that was taken from the inside of the vehicle. 

There was one view of the inside of the cab and one view that was looking 

out at the road, essentially the same view that appellant had. (Notes of 

testimony, 7/29/15 at 11.) Trooper Maner explained what he observed on 

the video:

[W]hat I saw was [appellant], he was looking down 

the road, east down Silvercrest, then looked left to 

see where he was turning into, and then began to 

turn and still keep his head turned left without 

having -- without turning his head back to recheck to 

see if it was still clear from traffic going westbound.
J. S38014/16

- 5 -

Id. at 15.

Trooper Maner also observed that appellant held a piece of paper in his 

left hand as he was turning left. (Id. at 15.) Trooper Maner believed that 

appellant may have been confused as to where he was turning because he 

was turning into an address which was different from the address he told 

Trooper Maner he sought. (Id. at 16.)

The trial court, as fact finder, accepted this testimony. “It is within the 

province of the fact finder to determine the weight to be accorded each 

witnesses' testimony and to believe all, part, or none of the evidence 

introduced at trial.” Commonwealth v. Petroll, 696 A.2d 817, 823 

(Pa.Super. 1997), citing Commonwealth v. Molinaro, 631 A.2d 1040, 

1042 (Pa.Super. 1993). As a result of this testimony and the trial court’s 

own observation of the video, the trial court determined that appellant 

began to turn left across the oncoming lane of traffic. The video and the 

testimony of Trooper Maner were sufficient for the trial court to conclude 

that appellant’s failure to look at the lane of traffic before he crossed it and 

the fact that he was driving with one hand constituted careless disregard. 

See Gezovich.

Appellant also contends that the Commonwealth failed to establish 

that appellant unintentionally caused Aronis’s death where no autopsy was 

performed. Jason Nicholas (“Nicholas”), deputy coroner for the County of 

Lehigh, investigated the death of Aronis. While he did not perform an 
J. S38014/16

- 6 -

autopsy, he viewed the body and spoke with Trooper Maner. As a result of 

his investigation, Nicholas concluded that the impact of the tractor-trailer 

caused multiple traumatic injuries which led to Aronis’s death. (Notes of 

testimony, 7/29/15 at 42.) Nicholas explained on cross-examination that it 

was the coroner’s office’s policy to not perform an autopsy if “they are going 

to be summary offenses.” (Id. at 44.) Once again, the trial court accepted 

the testimony of the Commonwealth’s witness. At trial, appellant’s attorney 

attempted to question Nicholas as to whether Aronis suffered a heart attack 

or an aneurysm prior to the collision, but the trial court sustained the 

Commonwealth’s objections to this line of questioning. Appellant points to 

no statute that required an autopsy. Nicholas’s testimony and report 

provide sufficient evidence for the conclusion that appellant’s driving caused 

Aronis’ death and that appellant violated Section 3714.

Finally, appellant contends that the evidence was insufficient to 

support a finding that he initiated a turn when there was a vehicle “so close 

as to constitute a hazard.” (Appellant’s brief at 12.)

Section 3322 of the Vehicle Code provides,

§ 3322. Vehicle turning left

The driver of a vehicle intending to turn left within an 

intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway 

shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle 

approaching from the opposite direction which is so 

close as to constitute a hazard.

75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3322.
J. S38014/16

- 7 -

Trooper Dennis E. Sims, Jr., formerly a collision analyst reconstruction 

specialist with the Pennsylvania State Police, testified that based on his 

examination of the video, Aronis was not speeding. (Notes of testimony, 

7/29/15 at 39.) Trooper Maner testified that, based on the video, appellant 

looked left into where he was turning and then turned without looking back 

to the other lane of the road to see whether it was still clear. (Id. at 15.) 

Given that appellant’s tractor-trailer collided with a motorcycle that was not 

speeding when he turned and that appellant was not watching for oncoming 

traffic when he turned, the trial court had sufficient evidence to conclude 

that appellant violated Section 3322.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 6/7/2016