Examining the Legal Fallout: 12-Year-Old’s Death in Father’s Pomona DUI Crash

Photo credit: @ASphotofamily Via Freepik

On the 57 Freeway in Pomona, a DUI crash resulted in the tragic death of a 12-year-old boy. The suspected driver was his father, 33-year-old Ignacio Vazquez. Incidents like these highlight the serious legal consequences of impaired driving in California. This article examines the potential legal ramifications, referencing California’s manslaughter statutes

Manslaughter vs. Murder

In California, a DUI incident resulting in death can lead to manslaughter or murder charges, based on the case details. The primary distinction lies in the intent and prior knowledge of the risks involved:

• Manslaughter: This is a charge for unintentional killings. Regarding DUI, “vehicular manslaughter” describes negligent actions without intent to kill by the driver.
• Murder: This charge arises when a driver, aware of DUI dangers from a prior conviction, drives recklessly anyway.

Father’s Potential Charges:

1. Driving Under the Influence (Vehicle Code Section 23152):

“A person is guilty of a public offense, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison or confinement in a county jail for not more than one year and by a fine of not less than three hundred ninety dollars ($390) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) if that person is convicted of a violation of Section 23152 or 23153…” 

If the father drove under the influence during the crash, he might face charges under this section.

2. DUI Resulting in Bodily Injury (Vehicle Code Section 23153):

“If any person is convicted of a first violation of Section 23153, that person shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison, or in a county jail for not less than 90 days nor more than one year, and by a fine of not less than three hundred ninety dollars ($390) nor more than one thousand dollars ($1,000).”

If the father’s impaired driving caused his son’s injury or death, he might face this charge. The penalties are more severe than a standard DUI due to the injury or fatality involved.

3. Vehicular Manslaughter While Intoxicated (Penal Code 191.5(b)):

This charge applies to DUI incidents causing death due to negligence, not gross negligence. If the father’s actions while driving under the influence led to the unfortunate death of his son, he could potentially face this charge.

4. Gross Vehicular Manslaughter While Intoxicated (Penal Code 191.5(a)):

If the father acted with gross negligence, causing his son’s death, he could face this stricter charge.

5. Second-Degree “Watson” Murder (Penal Code 187):

If the father had prior knowledge of the risks of DUI (typically from a previous DUI conviction and attending DUI school) and still chose to drive under the influence, leading to a fatal accident, he could potentially face this charge.

6. Elevated Blood Alcohol Concentration (Vehicle Code Section 23578):

“If an individual is convicted under Section 23152 or 23153, the court may consider a blood alcohol concentration of 0.15 percent or higher, or the refusal to take a breath or urine test, as grounds for increased penalties.”

If the father in the Pomona case had a notably high blood alcohol level, he might face heightened legal consequences.

7. Willful Infliction of Corporal Injury (Penal Code Section 273.5):

“(a) Any person who willfully inflicts corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition upon a victim described in subdivision (b) is guilty of a felony, and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, or in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of up to six thousand dollars ($6,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.”

If the father had physically harmed his son or another family member in addition to the DUI incident, he could potentially face charges under this section.

Defenses to Manslaughter Charges

In DUI-related manslaughter cases, an experienced criminal defense attorney can use various strategies to protect their client.

1. Lack of Negligence: The attorney may present evidence or arguments to demonstrate that the defendant’s actions, while perhaps mistaken, did not rise to the level of negligence or gross negligence required for a manslaughter conviction.

2. Absence of Intoxication: Through toxicology reports, witness testimonies, or other relevant evidence, the defense can assert that the defendant was not impaired or under the influence of alcohol or drugs during the incident.

3. Challenges to the Arrest Procedure: The defense might scrutinize the methods used during DUI testing or point out procedural errors. Violations of a defendant’s rights, like neglecting Miranda rights or mishandling evidence, can challenge the arrest or evidence

The incident on the 57 Freeway serves as a stark reminder of the dire consequences of driving under the influence. If you find yourself facing similar charges, it’s crucial to consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney. At The Law Offices of Arash Hashemi, we offer expert legal defense on DUI-related charges. Contact us today at (310) 448-1529 to schedule a consultation.