Duncan v. State

Hubert Lee Duncan was tried before a jury and convicted of serious injury by vehicle,1 driving under the influence of methamphetamine2 and endangering a child by driving under the influence.3 He appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the denial of his motion for a mistrial after it became known that a juror was a friend of, and had contact with, a state witness. The challenges are without merit, and we thus affirm Duncan’s conviction. 1. On appeal from a criminal conviction, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, and the appellant no longer enjoys the presumption of innocence.4 We do not weigh the evidence or assess the credibility of witnesses, but determine only if a rational trier of fact could have found the accused guilty of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt.5

Viewed in favor of the verdict, the evidence in the instant case shows that on April 14, 2004, Duncan was driving his Ford pickup truck with his four-year-old son as a passenger in the cab of the truck. As Duncan approached an intersection where the drivers in front of him were slowing down for a red traffic light, he slammed into the back of a smaller truck, forcing it into another vehicle and then into a ditch. As a result of the collision, the driver of the other truck was paralyzed from the neck down.