Bachelor’ Chris Soules Asks Court to Drop Leaving the Scene of an Accident Charges Related to Deadly Crash

Leaving the Scene of an Accident

Former star of reality tv show “The Bachelor” was arrested in his native Iowa last week and charged with leaving the scene of an accident with death after he is alleged to have rear ended a tractor driven by Kenny Mosher and fleeing the scene.  According to a news report, the accident occurred approximately 15 miles south of his hometown of Arlington, Iowa, a town featured in the 2015 season of the Bachelor.  According to police, when they arrived on scene they found Soules’ abandoned truck near the crash scene and alcoholic beverage containers within.  Soules made an initial appearance in Buchanan County on April 25, 2017 and was ultimately released on a $10,000 bond.  Soules’ attorneys have filed a motion to dismiss the felony charge, alleging in part that Soules did not violate Iowa’s leaving the scene of scene of an accident statute because he called 911 and identified himself.  His lawyers further claim that Soules remained on scene and attempted to resuscitate Mosher until first responders arrived, remaining for several minutes after their arrival.

While I am a Florida attorney and not licensed in Iowa, I cannot speak to the workings of Iowa’s criminal code.  Florida statute 316.027 requires the driver of a vehicle involved in a crash occurring on public or private property which results in the death of a person to immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the crash, or as close thereto as possible, and remain at the scene of the crash until he or she has fulfilled the requirements of Florida Statute 316.062.  Florida Statute 316.062, in this instance would require Soules to either give his name, address, and vehicle registration information to the other party to the crash or a police officer responding if the other party to the crash is not in a condition to receive the information.

Ultimately the State Attorney’s Office, in situations such as these, will assume that the individual left the scene because they were intoxicated.  Florida has contemplated the fact that this happens, more than it should unfortunately, and has closed the loophole on a safe harbor for one who leaves the scene in an accident causing death.  Regardless of whether the person is found to be driving under the influence at the time of crash leading to death, if the individual leaves the scene, they are subject to a four-year minimum mandatory prison term if convicted.  The charge is a first-degree felony as well, thereby requiring an adjudication of guilt.  In essence, what the legislature has done is eliminate any benefit for a person to flee the scene and, from a practical standpoint, likely makes it worse on one who does leave if they are to plea given the interpretation of their actions by the State and Judge.

In Soules’ instance, because he did call 911 and did give his information when no police officer was present, under Florida law, he could at least argue that he complied with statute.  Florida statute 316.062(2) states that when no police officer is present, the driver, after fulfilling the requirements of Florida Statute 316.027, shall forthwith report the crash to the nearest office of a duly authorized police authority and submit the information mentioned above.  Soules could argue that he remained on scene, rendered aid, called 911 and gave his information, and only left after first responders arrived.  A criminal attorney in Florida would argue that because he did this, he has complied with Statutory dictate. For argument’s sake, if he notified authorities of his whereabouts and they did not contact him, or did but did not have reasonable suspicion of DUI and therefor performed no DUI investigation, under Florida law it is at least arguable that he would have complied with his statutory duty.

While every State has different laws and verbiage within, in many instances when one is accused of a crime such as this, there is room for argument either way.  Whether Soules is guilty or not, the situation is a tragedy and the Iowa court system will ferret out the details.  If you’ve been charged with leaving the scene of an accident or another State or Federal crime, contact Fort Lauderdale criminal attorney Richard F. Della Fera, Esq. 954.514.9955

Stand Your Ground Law- Senate Bill 128

Florida’s Stand Your Ground Law

Stand Your Ground (SYG) has been a widely debated topic across the United States, especially with the numerous high-profile cases involving self-defense. Approximately twenty-two (22) states have some version of a stand your ground law. As of today, the states that have SYG laws include Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia.

Most Stand Your Ground laws change the common law requirement in self-defense, which requires a duty to retreat to the best of one’s ability before using force. All stand your ground laws have some form of “no duty to retreat” language in them. In Florida, a person who uses force in “justified” self-defense cannot be arrested, detained in custody, or charged and prosecuted. The new Florida Senate Bill 128 proposes to change some procedural aspects of SYG required to prove that the defendant qualifies for immunity.

Burden of Proof in Florida

In order to fully understand the significance of Senate Bill 128, you should understand the definition of “burden of proof.” Generally, the prosecution is tasked with the proving the defendant guilty. With such a “burden” falling on the State, the defendant does not have to prove or show anything. In Florida, self-defense is an affirmative defense.

An affirmative defense is the defendant’s side of the story put forth, that if proven true, creates a justification for an otherwise unlawful act. As of now, the Florida Supreme Court, in its majority opinion in Bretherick v. State, 170 So.3d 766, (Fla. 2015), has set forth the procedure for asserting immunity under SYG.

Under Bretherick, a defendant that claims immunity under SYG must prove by a preponderance of the evidence the entitlement to the immunity at a pretrial hearing. A preponderance of the evidence is a standard of proof that a proponent must meet in a pretrial hearing. The preponderance of the evidence is defined as “more likely than not.” Until SB 128 passes, a defendant must prove that it is more likely than not that he or she is entitled to immunity.

The Effect of Proposal 128 on Florida SYG

As stated above, under Bretherick, a defendant has the burden of proving that he or she is entitled to immunity under Stand Your Ground. If Senate Bill 128 is enacted, then the burden shifts from the defendant to the State, meaning that the prosecutor will have to prove that the defendant is not entitled to SYG immunity.

Additionally, Senate Bill 128 will change the standard of proof. Currently, the standard of proof is by a “preponderance of the evidence.” If SB 128 is enacted, then the standard of proof will be “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Beyond a reasonable doubt is a higher standard of proof than preponderance of the evidence.

Therefore, the State will have to prove that the defendant is not entitled to immunity beyond a reasonable doubt if CS/SB 128 passes the Florida Legislature.

Attorney for Self-defense in Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Being charged with a violent crime such as an assault, battery or homicide can be completely life changing, even if it is done in self-defense. Having an experienced criminal defense attorney to help explain Stand Your Ground law, and how it may apply to your case can alleviate some of the fear and stress caused by the trial process. Call Richard F. Della Fera, Esq. 954.514.9955