People v. Bammes

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that \involved in\ was not vague when the defendant turned into victims' path, who then swerved and were struck by another vehicle
• assuming “real cause” of accident was decedent’s unnecessary attempt to pass defendant after she pulled out in front of decedent, defendant was nevertheless “involved” in accident because her pulling into intersection precipitated some reaction on part of decedent
• driver who encroached on second vehicle, which swerved and collided with third vehicle, was “involved” in accident between second and third vehicles
• “fact that the jury also found defendant not guilty on the manslaughter charges is not inconsistent with their finding that she was ‘involved’” in the accident
• defendant drove directly in the path of other vehicles, causing two other vehicles to collide
• one is involved in an accident when one is “connected with (an accident) in a natural or logical manner,” and one can be involved in an accident without being its legal cause

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).