Man Held To Answer in Hit and Run Injury Case

Share:

by Biyao Ren

Honorable Judge Timothy L. Fall presided over the preliminary hearing for People versus H. Compton at Department 11 on December 7th, 2018. Mr. Compton was alleged to felony charge of hit and run with injury. Four witnesses were brought to stand for examination.

In the direct examination, People’s Deputy District Attorney Mr. Kian called Ms. AA, who was the victim of the injury case. Ms. AA testified that at 3:45PM on November 7th, 2018, while she was on the sidewalk, she was hit by a silver BMW at the intersection of B street and Eight street in the city of Davis. Ms. AA recalled that the speed of the vehicle was faster than the normal speed for the residential area. After the hit, people in the car did not attempt to stop to help her. She demonstrated that the crowd around her called 911 and she was transferred to UC Davis extension hospital in Sacramento.

Ms. AA stated that she got injuries on her head and on her left leg. On her forehead, she got a severely swollen lump, roughly a half baseball sized. The injury on her leg caused her pains and it made her difficult to walk for the first a few days. She stated that her bruising took roughly 2-3 weeks to go away and she had a back hurt problem after the injury.

In the cross examination, Public Defender Ms. Fisher ensured with Ms. AA that Ms. AA saw the car lose control while turning in front of her. Ms. AA believes that the driver appeared to lose control of the vehicle. She recalled that she heard the scratching sounds and she noticed that electronic box was damaged by the car. In the re-direct examination, Ms. AA recalled that the severely damaged electronic box was about her height, like 5 feet tall, 3 feet across, and in green color.

The second witness was Mr. TD, who is a police officer assisted the investigation of this case. Mr. TD demonstrated that he took photographs on scene, including pictures on electronic box, street, and some pieces of plastic from the vehicle. Mr. TD demonstrated that the pieces of plastic are like the lens of lighting on a vehicle. Mr. TD depicted that the electronic box was severely damaged and exposing its equipment. It was moved from the original location.

Mr. TD testified that the vehicle was located on about 100 yards away and its entire body was covered. Mr. TD demonstrated that the car had damaged on its passenger side with green paint scratch and its light was broken. Moreover, the right rear tire was flat.

The third witness was Mr. JE, who is also a police officer assisted the investigation of this case. Mr. JE testified that he had talked to the suspect’s mother, Mrs. Compton. Mr. JE demonstrated that Mrs. Compton recalled that her son was involved in an accident. The tire was exploded, and he was hit into the electronic box. Based on her description, her son did not notice that he was hit any person.

In the cross examination, Mr. JE testified that Mr. Compton had returned to the scene while the police were still there. Mr. JE demonstrated that the suspect’s mother encouraged her son to go back and to call the police.

The fourth witness was Mr. LG, who is a police officer in Davis, assisted the investigation of this case. Mr. LG testified that he had spoke with Mr. Compton and one of the witness, Mr. M. Mr. M was driving behind the suspect’s car. Mr. LG recalled that Mr. M described that the silver BMW while turning, was accelerated and lost control. Mr. LG demonstrated that Mr. Compton told him that he was afraid after the collision and drove to his friend’s house. Then, Mr. Compton and his friend drove to his mother’s house. Mr. LG recalled Mr. Compton said that he noticed the damage of the property but not any individual.

Mr. LG had also spoke with the suspect’s neighbor, Ms. S. Mr. LG demonstrated that Ms. S informed Mr. Compton that there was an injured person in the collision. Ms. S described Mr. Compton’s physical demeanors was scared.

After examination, Ms. Fisher raised several arguments. Ms. Fisher argued not to hold Mr. Compton to two Count 1 because he did not know he had hit a person. Second, Ms. Fisher requested to reduce the charge of enhancement 17b because Mr. Compton quickly returned to the scene, admitted his action, and explained. Third, Ms. Fisher requested for not holding Mr. Compton for the charge of another enhancement of injury. Her reason was that the injury was caused by accident rather than Mr. Compton’s purpose.

To respond, Mr. Kian identified that the day light was sufficient for a person to perceive the injury of another person. If one could identify the damage of electronic box, one should be able to notice the injury of a person, especially the injured person was right in front of the car. Also, Mr. Kian argued that hitting a person was more likely to make a person scared than hitting an electronic box. Mr. Kian believed that there is sufficient evidence to support one’s knowledge of noticing the injured person. Furthermore, Mr. Kian indicated that Mr. Compton did flee from the scene, which applied to the charge of hit and run with injury.

Honorable Judge Fall concluded that a jury trial will be held at Department 10, 8:30AM, December 21st, 2018.


Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for