Summary
The Supreme Court of Florida held that multiple convictions for DUI manslaughter are permissible when multiple deaths occur in a single DUI crash. The court concluded that the statutory use of "any" does not preclude separate convictions because legislative intent, statutory history, and the homicide nature of the offense establish that the intended unit of prosecution is each victim killed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the a/any test used to determine the unit of prosecution precludes multiple DUI-manslaughter convictions when multiple people die in a single DUI crash.
- Whether the DUI-manslaughter statute's legislative intent permits a separate conviction for each death caused by the defendant's DUI conduct.
Holdings
- Multiple convictions of DUI manslaughter may arise from multiple deaths occurring in a single DUI crash; the unit of prosecution is the number of victims killed, not the number of DUI traffic violations.
- The a/any test is a useful but nonexclusive linguistic tool for determining legislative intent; the use of the word any does not automatically create ambiguity or require application of the rule of lenity.
Key quotations
“For the reasons stated below, we answer the certified question in the negative and hold that multiple convictions of DUI manslaughter may arise from multiple deaths in a single DUI crash.” (863 So. 2d at 1180)
“The a/any test should not be applied to create an ambiguity where none exists and then to reach a result contrary to clear legislative intent.” (863 So. 2d at 1188)
“We therefore hold that the a/any test adopted in Grappin does not preclude multiple convictions of DUI manslaughter where multiple deaths occur in a single DUI crash.” (863 So. 2d at 1188)
Factual background
David Bautista drove under the influence of alcohol and collided with another car, fatally injuring its two occupants. He was convicted of two counts of DUI manslaughter. The opinion also notes that Bautista fled the crash scene without rendering aid or providing information to responding officers, but the certified issue concerned only the permissible number of DUI-manslaughter convictions.
Procedural history
Bautista was convicted in the trial court of two counts of DUI manslaughter after a crash killed two occupants of another vehicle. The Fourth District affirmed, relying on Melbourne v. State, and certified whether the a/any test precluded multiple convictions arising from multiple deaths in one DUI crash. The Supreme Court of Florida rephrased the certified question, answered it in the negative, and approved the district court's decision.