Bradley W. Hobbs v. State of Indiana

Summary

The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed Bradley W. Hobbs’s conviction for Level 6 felony leaving the scene of an accident and the accompanying habitual offender enhancement. The court held that sufficient evidence established Hobbs failed to provide identification information, render reasonable assistance, and notify authorities after the motorcycle accident. It further concluded that an automated 911 call from Hobbs’s cellphone did not satisfy his statutory duty because there was no evidence he knew of or affirmatively ensured the call.

Holdings

1. Indiana Code section 9-26-1-1.1(a)(2) plainly required Hobbs to provide his name, address, vehicle registration, and driver's license to Whitham or someone attending her before leaving the scene. Because Hobbs admitted that he left without providing any of that information, the evidence was sufficient.
2. The evidence was sufficient to prove that Hobbs failed to provide reasonable assistance to the injured passenger before leaving the scene. The duty was not eliminated because Hobbs was not personally directed by authorities or because other people were assisting the victim.
3. An automated 911 call initiated by Hobbs's cellphone did not satisfy Hobbs's statutory duty because the statute requires the operator to take affirmative action personally to notify authorities or to ensure that another person does so. Merely possessing a cellphone with an automated crash-notification feature, without knowing of or causing the call, was insufficient.

Questions Presented

1. Whether sufficient evidence supported Hobbs's conviction for leaving the scene of an accident.
2. Whether Indiana Code section 9-26-1-1.1(a)(2) required Hobbs to provide his name, address, vehicle registration, and driver's license to Whitham or someone attending her before leaving the scene, despite their long-term relationship and the one-vehicle nature of the accident.
3. Whether the statutory duty to provide reasonable assistance was excused because Hobbs was not personally directed by authorities and others were already assisting Whitham.
4. Whether an automated 911 call initiated by Hobbs's cellphone, without evidence that Hobbs knew of or affirmatively caused the call, satisfied his statutory duty to notify authorities or ensure that another person did so.

Disposition

affirmed