Opinion ID: 2302531
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 39

Heading: The September 18, 2008 Accident

Text: 35. In the late evening on September 18, 2008, Davis was in a single vehicle accident. [46] 36. Davis consumed alcohol prior to the accident. [47] He also had a small glass of wine with him in the car which spilled when he crashed. [48] 37. Davis went directly home, and attempted to find a tow truck company to bring the car home but was unsuccessful. [49] 38. Davis contacted his buddy, Daniel Logan (Logan), when he arrived home in an attempt to locate a tow truck. [50] Logan recalled Mr. Davis telling him he wanted a tow truck to get his vehicle out before the police saw it. [51] Logan testified that when Davis called him, he sounded a little panicked. Words were slurred. [52] 39. On the same evening as the crash occurred, two New Castle County officers investigated. One of the officers went to Davis's home to investigate. Davis testified that when the officer arrived at his residence, he answered the door with a glass of wine in his hand. [53] The officer testified that when Davis answered the door it appeared he had been drinking and the officer could smell alcohol on him. [54] Davis told the officer he had some drinks to calm his nerves. [55] When the officer returned with Davis to the scene of the accident, Davis told the second officer, who was the lead investigator, that he had a few alcoholic drinks when he got home to calm his nerves. [56] 40. The lead investigator wrote in his report that Davis informed him that he was traveling [westbound] on Stone Block Row. He was rounding the curve, in the area of Brecks Lane. He advised he was driving to[o] fast, and was on the cell phone. As a result he lost control. [57] 41. Although the investigating officer reported that there was visible damage to an approximate 30-foot section of a wooden fence, [58] Davis stated he did not think it a reportable accident as he didn't know there was any property damage at the time it occurred. [59] 42. The lead investigator noted on the police report that a hand held cell phone was a driver distraction. [60] Davis denied that he informed the investigating officers that he was on the cell phone, and stated that he told them he did not have it with him. [61] 43. The lead investigator also noted on the police report yesalcohol suspected based on his initial observations of the vehicle. [62] However, the lead investigator did not administer a blood alcohol test because: Based upon what he told me, in my mind, I would not have been able to determine if his blood alcohol level was high because he drank when he was home or was it high because he was intoxicated while he was driving. That was the reason I did not give it because it wouldn't have painted a clear picture of when in fact the alcohol was consumed. [63] 44. The lead investigating officer charged Davis with Unreasonable Speed and Failure to Report an Accident on a Public Highway with Property Damage of $500 or more. [64] 45. The lead investigator recalled asking Davis whether he drank before the accident and Davis stated no. [65] 46. Although Mr. Davis denies that he drank wine before the police arrived in order to circumvent the police investigation, [66] Logan testified that the day after the September 18 accident he again spoke with Davis, and he sounded like another person.... A degree of arrogance. Jubilation. An entirely different person than the night before. [67] Davis told Logan, `I got home and the lawyer in me came out, and I popped open a couple bottles of wine.' [68] Davis also informed Logan that he drank before the accident and that was the reason he popped open the bottles of wine. [69] Mr. Logan explained: A: He was drinking. He didn't want to have someone come to their home... He didn't want someone to come to their hometo his home and find that he was drinking. So as a result, he popped open the wine so no one could sayhe just had the wine while he was home. Q: Mr. Davis told you that? A: Yes. Absolutely. That's when he said to me  The lawyer in me came out.  [70] 47. Marshall also recalls Davis informing her in the days following the accident that he had been drinking and that he had lost control, after which he ran back to his home ... and opened two bottles of wine and drank them and waited for the police to arrive. [71] She further recalls that [h]e was pretty proud of himself because he had gotten out of being charged with a DUI or any kind of real trouble. He did indicate at the time that the police seemed to know exactly what he was doing and they knew that their hands were tied. [72] 48. The Attorney General's office eventually dismissed the charges of failure to report and unsafe speed and Respondent pleaded guilty to inattentive driving as reflected in the guilty plea form he attached to his Reinstatement Questionnaire. 49. Davis's description in the Questionnaire of what occurred on September 18 includes the following:  At the time of the accident I did not have my cell phone with me, so I walked home.  Originally, I was charged with Unsafe Speed and Failure to Report the Accident, however, upon an explanation of the fact that I did not have a means of communication (i.e. cell phone) with me at the time of the accident and a full explanation of the accident, the charge was reduced to inattentive driving.  Upon arriving home, I was greeted by the New Castle County Police.  I provided full cooperation with their [the police] investigation of the crash.  I provided full cooperation to the officers. [73]