Background
Jason P. Brown drove his truck over two people sleeping beneath a white blanket in an alley. After a witness told Brown that he had run them over, Brown denied it and drove away. One victim died, and the other suffered serious injuries requiring emergency surgery.
A jury convicted Brown of leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in serious bodily injury. The elemental instructions did not require proof of a culpable mental state. The trial court then adjudicated Brown a habitual offender without submitting the habitual-offender factual questions to a jury and imposed a total prison sentence of sixty years. The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed.
The Court’s Holding
The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed. It held that People v. Manzo remains good law and that Colorado’s leaving-the-scene offenses involving death or serious bodily injury are strict-liability crimes requiring no proof of a culpable mental state. The court concluded that Rehaif v. United States did not overrule Manzo, and that the legislature’s repeated amendments of the statute without adding a mens rea requirement supported continued adherence to that precedent. The trial court therefore did not err or violate due process by omitting a culpable mental state from the jury instructions.
The court also held that Colorado’s prior habitual-offender scheme was not facially unconstitutional. Although the jury should have decided whether Brown’s prior convictions arose from separate and distinct criminal episodes, the trial court’s failure to submit that issue to the jury was nonstructural and harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Authenticated records overwhelmingly established Brown’s identity, multiple prior felony convictions, and distinct conviction and sentencing dates. Justice Samour disagreed with retaining Manzo but concurred in the judgment because he considered the instructional error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
Key Takeaways
- Colorado’s leaving-the-scene offenses involving death or serious bodily injury remain strict-liability crimes under Manzo.
- The former habitual-offender statute was not facially unconstitutional, but a jury should determine whether prior convictions arose from separate and distinct criminal episodes.
- Failure to submit that habitual-offender question to a jury is subject to constitutional harmless-error review and was harmless on this record.
Why It Matters
The decision preserves Colorado’s rule that prosecutors need not prove a driver knew of an accident to obtain a felony leaving-the-scene conviction involving death or serious bodily injury. The court left any change to that rule to the General Assembly.
The ruling also confirms that jury-trial errors in habitual-offender proceedings do not automatically require reversal when overwhelming evidence establishes the necessary facts beyond reasonable dispute.