City of Beaverton v. Pack

When reviewing the sufficiency of a jury instruction, the Court will review all instructions given to determine whether the jury was properly informed of the applicable requirements of the crime charged.

Defendant appealed a jury conviction for failure to perform the duties of a driver. Defendant lived in an apartment complex with assigned parking spaces. While backing his car out of his space, Plaintiff struck an unattended landscaping truck. A number of landscapers witnessed Defendant's vehicle hit the truck and drive off. Defendant was identified and arrested the next day. At trial, Defendant argued that he did not know whether he hit the landscaping truck because he was stressed out at the time, and was having difficulties hearing because of a build-up of earwax. Nevertheless, Defendant was convicted of failure to perform the duties of a driver. Defendant appealed. Defendant argued that the trial court's jury instruction improperly left out the State's obligation to prove that Defendant had "knowledge" that damage likely resulted. The Court disagreed. The Court held that the trial court's jury instruction was proper and implied to the jury that the State had to prove Defendant knew that the collision occurred and knew that the collision likely resulted in damages. Affirmed.