Kirk v. State, 7 Div. 99

Citation47 So.2d 283,35 Ala.App. 405
Decision Date30 June 1950
Docket Number7 Div. 99
PartiesKIRK v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

Scott, Dawson & Stockton, of Fort Payne, for appellant.

A. A. Carmichael, Atty. Gen., and Wm. N. McQueen, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

The following charge was refused to defendant:

I charge you that if the State has offered no evidence that the place where the driving took place was a public highway, and if there has been no other testimony tending to show that this viaduct was a public highway, then you should acquit the defendant.

HARWOOD, Judge.

In the court below the appellant was tried upon a complaint, which omitting the formal parts, reads:

'Cecil Kirk did drive a motor vehicle on the highways of DeKalb Co., Ala. in a reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of others.'

The sufficiency of the complaint was not challenged by demurrer, or otherwise.

Appellant's counsel now argues that the complaint is void, and therefore cannot support the verdict and judgment of guilty rendered thereon. If the complaint is void, appellant's contention is meritorious.

Section 3, Title 36, Code of Alabama 1940, defines the offense of reckless driving in two alternatives. The second alternative is as follows: 'Any person who drives [a motor] vehicle upon a highway * * * without due caution and circumspection and at a speed or in a manner so as to endanger or be likely to endanger any person or property, shall be guilty of reckless driving.'

It is to be noted that the complaint substantially follows the words of the statute, except that it uses the word 'reckess' instead of the phrase 'without due caution and circumspection.'

As stated in McQueen v. State, 31 Ala.App. 101, 13 So.2d 59, 60, certiorari denied 244 Ala. 251, 13 So.2d 61: 'The law is that an indictment must state the facts constituting the offense in ordinary and concise language, in such manner as to enable a person of common understanding to know what is intended. Words used in a statute to define an offense need not be strictly pursued in the indictment; it is sufficient to use other words conveying the same meaning.'

The word 'reckless,' when applied to negligence, per se has no legal significance other than simple negligence, or want of due care. Stringer v. Alabama Mineral R. Co., 99 Ala. 397, 13 So. 75; Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Hall, 105 Ala. 599, 17 So. 176.

Likewise, the phrase, 'without due caution and circumspection,' constituting one of the alternative characterizations of reckless driving, means no more than negligence, for if one drive on a highway in such manner, he is guilty of negligence. Neessen v. Armstrong, 213 Iowa 378, 239 N.W. 56, 60.

The terms 'reckless,' and 'without due caution and circumspection' are synonymous. Actually, to a layman the term 'reckless' is probably of clearer import than the phrase 'without due caution and circumspection,' in so far as informing him of what he is called upon to defend. The complaint was in our opinion sufficient, though not in the exact verbiage of the statute.

The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Wood v. Kesler
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • March 4, 2003
    ...Id. Under Alabama law, the phrase "without due caution and circumspection" means "no more than negligence." Kirk v. State, 35 Ala.App. 405, 47 So.2d 283, 285 (1950). Wood thus may be guilty of reckless driving by driving negligently and at a speed or in a manner likely to endanger any perso......
  • State v. Wilcox
    • United States
    • Oregon Supreme Court
    • April 15, 1959
    ...Neessen v. Armstrong, 1931, 213 Iowa 378, 239 N.W. 56, 57; Barkley v. State, 1932, 165 Tenn. 309, 54 S.W.2d 944; Kirk v. State, Ala.App.1950, 47 So.2d 283. However, we agree with those courts which regard the reckless driving statute as requiring more than ordinary negligence to constitute ......
  • State v. Thomas
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 13, 2015
    ...phrase ‘without due caution and circumspection,’ in so far as informing him of what he is called upon to defend.”Kirk v. State, 35 Ala.App. 405, 407, 47 So.2d 283, 285 (1950). Thus, checking the box for the phrase “reckless driving” in the UTTC was sufficient to apprise Thomas of the offens......
  • White v. State, 5 Div. 423
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • December 22, 1953
    ...'willfulness and wantonness' is to be taken, if not as expressing the same idea, at least as not repugnant to them. In Kirk v. State, 35 Ala.App. 405, 47 So.2d 283, 285, we held that the second characterization of reckless driving in the statute means nothing more than negligence and 'the w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT