Court Opinion

ID: 9652522
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 17:25:16.684733+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:12:52.135391
License: Public Domain

Justice O’CONNOR
dissents from the denial of the further motion for rehearing and for rehearing en banc.
A majority of the justices of the Court voted to deny the further motion for rehearing en banc.
O’CONNOR, Justice, dissenting on further motion for Rehearing and for Rehearing En Banc.
I dissent from the majority’s resolution of points of error one and two.
The appellant collided with the victims early one morning on a busy freeway between Houston and Galveston. One of the victims of the collision was sitting in the stalled car and the other was behind the car pushing it. The majority’s analysis ignores the possibility that collision occurred because the victims’ car was immobile on a fast-moving freeway, it was dark and visibility was not good, and one of the victims was blocking the taillights of the car. These factors alone could have made *323the collision inevitable, regardless of the appellant’s intoxication.
I do not believe the jury could find, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellant’s intoxication was responsible for the collision. In fact, the jury’s assessment of only four years imprisonment in each case is some indication that it was less than certain the appellant’s intoxication caused the collision.