Opinion ID: 1933783
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: Atwood contends the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict because the State failed in its proof of the recklessness component of motor vehicle homicide. Evidence is sufficient if it could convince a rational trier of fact that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Veal, 564 N.W.2d 797, 803-04 (Iowa 1997). The evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the State, making any legitimate inferences that may fairly and reasonably be deduced from the evidence. Id. at 804. A person commits a class C felony when he/she unintentionally causes the death of another by ... [d]riving a motor vehicle in a reckless manner with willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.... Iowa Code § 707.6A(1)(b). Reckless driving is composed of three elements: (1) a conscious and intentional operation of a motor vehicle, (2) in a manner that creates an unreasonable risk of harm to others, (3) when this risk is or should have been known to the driver. State v. Conyers, 506 N.W.2d 442, 444 (Iowa 1993). Atwood argues his conduct did not amount to recklessness. However, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, there was clearly sufficient evidence of that element. Atwood was driving down a road with a speed limit of thirty-five miles per hour. His passenger testified they were traveling very fast and stated to deputy Yoder that the defendant appeared to be angry. Another witness testified the car had been going fast. Another witness who lived close to the accident site testified she heard an extremely loud motor, which is unusual if they're driving the speed limit. Another witness heard Atwood's car coming and testified it seemed like the RPMs got more and more and more and more and were climbing real loud. Another witness testified that the roaring of the engine was very loud. Deputy Yoder testified it was his opinion that Atwood was traveling over 100 miles per hour, and Atwood's own experts set his speed at fifty to fifty-five. A motorist coming from the opposite direction testified he saw Atwood's car coming across the centerline into my line of traffic, and seemed to be headed right for him for a period of time. He saw the Atwood car go up onto several lawns and flip. This witness also testified he did not see anything in the road that would have caused Atwood to swerve. Passenger Sivertsen testified he saw the car going sideways, and felt himself pushed up against the car as the car crossed the centerline. Another witness testified that, when he saw the car, the wheels jerked and kinda slowly moved and skidded out of control. Several witnesses testified to the car flipping numerous times. The evidence of recklessness was substantial, and the district court properly denied Atwood's motion for directed verdict.