Opinion ID: 1700534
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: PEOPLE v KNEIP

Text: On August 25, 1990, at approximately 1:50 A.M., Steven Barnes was killed when the defendant's vehicle struck him. The victim, a barefoot pedestrian, clad only in a pair of shorts and carrying his tennis shoes  one in each hand  was crossing Haggerty Road near Cherry Hill Road in Canton Township. This area was not illuminated by artificial lighting. The victim had reached the left-turn lane when the defendant's vehicle approached. The defendant, who was driving south on Haggerty Road, entered the left-turn lane in order to make a left turn, when his vehicle struck the victim. The defendant was not speeding, and there is no indication that he was driving erratically. However, he was drunk. [7] As a result of the impact, the victim was thrown from the left-turn lane into the middle of the northbound lane of Haggerty Road. His head was pointing east toward the curb, and his feet were pointing west toward the center lane of Haggerty Road. A witness to the accident examined the victim immediately after the impact and determined that he was still breathing. As the witness knelt over the victim, a second car approached. The witness tried to flag the car down, but it drove over the victim, causing severe internal injuries. The expert testimony indicated that both sets of injuries were severe and independently could have resulted in the victim's death. The defendant was tried in a bench trial. The trial court recognized that a conflict existed regarding the proximate cause element and applied the standard used in civil cases. The trial court stated: When a number of factors contribute to produce an injury, one actor's negligence will not be considered a proximate cause of the harm unless it was a substantial factor in producing the injury.[ [8] ]    The defendant's conduct, then, was without question a substantial cause of the death of the deceased. It also noted that the victim's contributory negligence of walking in the left-turn lane of an extremely dark road, although not considered an affirmative defense, and the negligence of the second driver, both were factors leading to the death of the deceased.... The defendant was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. [9] He was sentenced to five years probation, with the first year to be spent on a tether. The tether option subsequently was removed, leaving the remaining sentence intact. The Court of Appeals reversed the defendant's conviction, stating that it was obligated to follow Tims. [10] We granted the prosecution's application for leave to appeal. [11]