Case Caption: Kenneth Milligan v. People of the Virgin IslandsCase Number: S. Ct. Crim. No. 2016-0090Date: 09/11/2018Author: Hodge, Rhys S. Citation: Summary: A conviction for reckless driving is reversed because the People failed to elicit sufficient evidence to support the elements of the statute, 20 V.I.C. § 492, which defines recklessness as conduct evincing either a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of person or property. Given that the jury determined that it did not have sufficient evidence to convict this defendant under the negligent homicide standard, there is likewise no way the evidence was sufficient to convict him of the same or higher standard of willful and wanton conduct necessary for a finding of reckless driving. To convict him of the essential elements of reckless driving, the jury would also have had to draw from the trial record evidence sufficient to support a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant felt, but disregarded, signs that he was too tired to drive. Unlike negligence, which only requires a showing of carelessness, reckless driving requires the defendant to have demonstrated a malicious and purposeful indifference, i.e. willful or wanton disregard for the safety of others, and the People failed to elicit any such evidence. Further, the People failed to produce sufficient evidence to support a finding that defendant struck the victim because he fell asleep. To reach a finding in this case that the defendant was (1) sleep deprived and (2) recklessly disregarded signs of sleep deprivation when he got behind the wheel, the jury would have had to draw one inference upon another, and a verdict cannot rest on the mere suspicion, speculation, or conjecture, or on an overly attenuated piling of inference upon inference. The conviction is reversed.Attachment: Open Document or Opinion