Geljack v. State

671 N.E.2d 163 (1996)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D was adjudged an habitual traffic offender in December 1992 and had his driving privileges suspended for ten years beginning January 1993.D was a passenger in a car with his wife and daughter when his wife observed that the car's brakes appeared to be failing. They were on their way to keep a doctor's appointment. While his wife and daughter were at the doctor's office, D decided to drive the car to a brake shop instead of having it towed by a wrecker. The car's brakes completely failed and D ran a red light. A police officer was present and arrested and charged D with operating a motor vehicle while his privileges were suspended. At trial, D argued that an emergency existed thereby excusing driving while suspended. D claimed it was necessary for him to drive to the brake shop as he did not want his wife and daughter to ride in the car for fear of the brakes failing. The trial court instructed the jury on the emergency defense. It stated in part that the defendant must bear the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to establish the defense. D objected claiming that was unconstitutional. D was convicted and appealed.