COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA
Present: Judges Baker, Willis and Overton
Argued at Norfolk, Virginia
MICHAEL JEROME FALTZ
MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY
v. Record No. 0650-97-1 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON
FEBRUARY 24, 1998
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY
E. Everett Bagnell, Judge
David B. Hargett (Joseph D. Morrissey;
Morrissey, Hershner & Jacobs, on brief), for
appellant.
Donald E. Jeffrey, III, Assistant Attorney
General (Richard Cullen, Attorney General;
Leah A. Darron, Assistant Attorney General,
on brief), for appellee.
Michael Jerome Faltz (defendant) was convicted of
involuntary manslaughter in violation of Code § 18.2-36.1(A) for
causing the death of a passenger by driving his vehicle while
intoxicated. He appeals the conviction, claiming that the
Commonwealth did not prove the fatal accident was caused by his
extreme intoxication. Because we find the Commonwealth carried
its burden, we affirm.
The parties are fully conversant with the record in the
cause, and because this memorandum opinion carries no
precedential value, we recite only those facts necessary to the
disposition of this appeal.
*
Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not
designated for publication.
We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the
Commonwealth, granting to it all reasonable inferences fairly
deducible therefrom. See Martin v. Commonwealth, 4 Va. App. 438,
443, 358 S.E.2d 415, 418 (1987). We "'discard the evidence of
the accused in conflict with that of the Commonwealth, and regard
as true all the credible evidence favorable to the
Commonwealth.'" Parks v. Commonwealth, 221 Va. 492, 498, 270
S.E.2d 755, 759 (1980) (quoting Wright v. Commonwealth, 196 Va.
132, 137, 82 S.E.2d 603, 606 (1954)). So viewed, the facts
establish that defendant drove his vehicle down Flaggy Run Road
in Southampton County while intoxicated. At a bend in the road,
he steered the vehicle onto the right hand shoulder, continued
down the shoulder for approximately 366 feet, hit a dirt
embankment and then flipped his vehicle back onto the road,
landing on the roof. His passenger, Robert Doles, suffered a
broken neck and was pronounced dead at the scene. Trooper J.A.
Brown, the police officer who investigated the accident, found no
tire tracks which would indicate that defendant attempted to
swerve his vehicle or make a sudden change in direction.
An hour and one-half after the accident defendant registered
.22 grams per 210 liters of breath on an alcohol breathalizer.
He also failed a field sobriety test administered by Trooper
Brown. When questioned as to the cause of the accident,
defendant claimed that a "big black truck" had driven toward him
from the opposite direction and caused him to drive off the road.
- 2 -
"Code § 18.2-36.1(A), requires proof of a causal connection
between the driver's intoxication and the death of another
person." Pollard v. Commonwealth, 20 Va. App. 94, 99, 455 S.E.2d
283, 286 (1995). The Commonwealth was not required to disprove
stories which "spring from the imagination of the defendant."
Hamilton v. Commonwealth, 16 Va. App. 751, 755, 433 S.E.2d 27, 29
(1993) (citations omitted). In the instant case, the trial court
clearly disbelieved defendant's tales of a phantom truck which
mysteriously appeared, ran him off the road and then vanished.
Instead, it was persuaded by the fact that: (1) defendant admits
he drove off the road, causing the accident, (2) tire marks at
the scene are inconsistent with defendant's claim that he swerved
to avoid a truck and (3) defendant was in a dangerously
intoxicated state. Under these circumstances the trial court
properly inferred that defendant, enveloped in his drunken
stupor, missed the curve in the road, drove into the embankment
and killed his passenger. See Pollard, 20 Va. App. at 99, 455
S.E.2d at 286. As the Supreme Court of Virginia has said under
similar circumstances,
[a]bsent evidence of any other cause for the
car leaving the pavement, the only reasonable
inference is that the proximate cause was the
driver's impaired perception, retarded
reflexes, and disrupted motor coordination
resulting from the quantity of alcohol he had
so recently consumed.
Beck v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 1, 5, 216 S.E.2d 8, 10 (1975).
Because we find the Commonwealth proved defendant's
- 3 -
intoxication caused the death of Robert Doles, we affirm the
conviction.
Affirmed.
- 4 -