In the notable case of Bellevue v. Redlack, the Washington Court of Appeals addressed the issue of whether a person can be prosecuted for both negligent driving and driving while intoxicated (DWI) arising from the same incident. This case highlights the legal boundaries of RCW 46.61.525 (negligent driving) and RCW 46.61.502 (driving while intoxicated), focusing on the distinctions between these offenses and their implications in court.
Background of the Case
On November 27, 1982, Robert P. Redlack was stopped by Bellevue police after a motor vehicle accident and issued citations for both negligent driving and DWI. Two days later, Redlack forfeited bail on the negligent driving charge but pleaded guilty to the DWI charge. He later withdrew his guilty plea and moved to dismiss the DWI charge, arguing that prosecuting him for both offenses would violate double jeopardy.
Key Legal Issues
The primary legal question was whether trying Redlack for both negligent driving and DWI, which stemmed from the same traffic stop, would constitute double jeopardy. Under the law, double jeopardy protects individuals from being prosecuted twice for the same offense. However, the court ruled that negligent driving under RCW 46.61.525 and DWI under RCW 46.61.502 are distinct offenses with separate elements.
Negligent driving focuses on the manner in which a vehicle is operated—whether it endangers others—while DWI deals with the driver’s condition, specifically intoxication. Because these offenses have different elements, prosecuting Redlack for both did not violate double jeopardy.
Court’s Decision
The Washington Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal of the DWI charge, allowing Redlack to be tried for both negligent driving and driving while intoxicated. The court emphasized that the legislature did not intend for negligent driving to be a lesser-included offense of DWI, meaning both charges can arise from the same incident without violating double jeopardy protections.
Impact of the Case
This ruling has significant implications for drivers and legal professionals alike. It clarifies that a person can face charges for both negligent driving and DWI if their behavior endangers others while they are under the influence. The case underscores the importance of understanding Washington law, especially RCW 46.61.525 and RCW 46.61.502, in relation to traffic stops, intoxication, and negligent driving.
For more details, you can read the full case at Bellevue v. Redlack.
Review our client resources here
Contact us anytime for your urgent legal needs.
About Blanford Law: We are no-nonsense, relentless, fair, and honest. We are great listeners instead of fast talkers, that is just who we are. More than 20 years ago, Ken began practicing law with a deeply-seeded belief that every person has the right to the best legal representation available. He built his law firm on that belief. Another belief that he strongly adheres to is his fundamental belief that clients deserve respect, with no assumptions or preconceived notions. If you or someone you know is accused of a crime or injured as a result of the negligence of another, please have them call us at 253-720-9304 or email us info@blanfordlaw.com
