How Can Hit and Run Be Charged for a Single Car Accident

[nlt1218]

My question involves a traffic ticket from the state of: Oregon

My boyfriend who is on parole for a few more months got in an accident the other night. He swerved to avoid hitting a cat and ended up in a ditch/grazing a tree, resulting in minor damage to his vehicle. No other car, person, or property was hit to his knowledge. He did not immediately leave the scene, but after assessing the damage to his car he determined there was nothing preventing him from driving it, nor was there any damage he needed to report. He went home. When he got there, cops were there. He lives in a halfway house so he assumed it was for one of the other guys who are constantly in trouble. The cops saw him park his car and didn’t say anything when he went into the house. One of his housemates then told him the cops were there about a car matching the color and make of his being in an accident. Since the cops had seen him park and didn’t say anything to him, he figured they were not looking for him necessarily. He went to bed. The cops talking to his housemate asked about him, and they gave the cops his number. They left him a message saying to call the non-emergency number as soon as he could. He did everything he could to try to get ahold of the deputy he needed to talk to. When he got off work he went to work on his car so it would be legal to drive (there had been damage to the blinker). His roommate called him later to tell him the cop was at his house. He talked to the cop and told him he was on his way. The cop said he mowed down a mailbox. Parolee asked if he was going to get arrested and the cop said “we’ll see how the car looks.” Sure enough, he got arrested. Charged with hit and run and reckless driving.

This is all of the information I have, and I have no reason to believe it is inaccurate or incomplete. However, this is just very bizarre to me. Why did they arrest him? I have looked at the statutes over and over again, and even if he had KNOWINGLY damaged the mailbox, there is no way the damage to that or his car could be enough ($1500+, according to the statutes) to need to report it. No one was injured, and, again, to his knowledge, he did not hit anyone's property. I am not saying he didn't hit the mailbox, but I know that if he had realized it, he would have rectified the situation. He had nothing to fear or to lose (he thought), hence why he went out of his way to talk to the police.

I also am wondering what his rights are in terms of finding out if someone called it in or if a cop saw him. He had no reason to flee if he had known he caused damage, as he has insurance and was not driving drunk or anything. I talked to him right after it happened, and it did not occur to either of us, or my mom who was with me, that he would need to report this. The cops’ slowness made us figure it was definitely not anything serious, so we were pretty shocked he got arrested.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Why do you imagine that the damage would have to exceed $1,500 for a crime to be charged?

(1) A person commits the offense of failure to perform the duties of a driver when property is damaged if the person is the driver of any vehicle and the person does not perform duties required under any of the following: (a) If the person is the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident that results only in damage to a vehicle that is driven or attended by any other person the person must perform all of the following duties:

(A) Immediately stop the vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close thereto as possible. Every stop required under this subparagraph shall be made without obstructing traffic more than is necessary.

(B) Remain at the scene of the accident until the driver has fulfilled all of the requirements under this paragraph.

(C) Give to the other driver or passenger the name and address of the driver and the registration number of the vehicle that the driver is driving and the name and address of any other occupants of the vehicle.

(D) Upon request and if available, exhibit and give to the occupant of or person attending any vehicle damaged the number of any documents issued as evidence of driving privileges granted to the driver.

(b) If the person is the driver of any vehicle that collides with any vehicle that is unattended, the person shall immediately stop and:

(A) Locate and notify the operator or owner of the vehicle of the name and address of the driver and owner of the vehicle striking the unattended vehicle; or

(B) Leave in a conspicuous place in the vehicle struck a written notice giving the name and address of the driver and of the owner of the vehicle doing the striking and a statement of the circumstances thereof.

(c) If the person is the driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting only in damage to fixtures or property legally upon or adjacent to a highway, the person shall do all of the following:

(A) Take reasonable steps to notify the owner or person in charge of the property of such fact and of the driver’s name and address and of the registration number of the vehicle the driver is driving.

(B) Upon request and if available, exhibit any document issued as official evidence of a grant of driving privileges to the driver.

[/indent]
(2) The offense described in this section, failure to perform the duties of a driver when property is damaged, is a Class A misdemeanor and is applicable on any premises open to the public.

The police are taking the position that your boyfriend hit a mailbox then drove away - a crime. He is also charged with reckless driving - another crime. "I swerved to miss a cat" isn't a sufficient excuse for completely losing control of your vehicle, and it's beyond question that his driving endangered "the safety of persons or property"

If he was sober, the chance that he went off the road and hit a mailbox without realizing it, or wouldn't have noticed a mailbox lying on the ground when he got out to inspect the damage, are pretty close to nil. The police are skeptical of hit-and-run drivers who later claim, "I swerved to miss a [random animal]" because 99% of the time the actual cause of the accident was drunk/impaired driving.

[nlt1218]

I 811.745 When accident must be reported to police officer or law enforcement agency. (1) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, any accident occurring on a highway or upon premises open to the public resulting in injury or death to any person is subject to the reporting requirements under the following sections:

(a) The reporting requirements for drivers under ORS 811.748.

(b) The reporting requirements for occupants of vehicles in accidents under ORS 811.750.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, an accident occurring on a highway or upon premises open to the public resulting in damage to the property of any person in excess of $1,500 is subject to the following reporting requirements:

(a) The driver of a vehicle that has more than $1,500 damage must report the accident in the manner specified under ORS 811.748.

(b) If the property damage is to property other than a vehicle involved in the accident, each driver involved in the accident must report the accident in the manner specified under ORS 811.748.

(c) If a vehicle involved in the accident is damaged to the extent that the vehicle must be towed from the scene of the accident, each driver involved in the accident must report the accident in the manner specified under ORS 811.748.

That is where I got the $1500.
Maybe it's just me, but if I did not knowingly damage someone's property, there is no way I would leave my information on a TREE I damaged. Also, if they had any suspicion he was driving under the influence, why would they let him sleep it off instead of testing him immediately? He did not tell them about the animal, for that very reason. But since I spoke with him directly after, I knew about it. Further, it has already been established that he was sober but I won't get too specific. Thanks anyway!

[Mr. Knowitall]

As you can see, ORS 811.700 has no damage threshold.

The police didn't "let him sleep it off" - they presumably didn't have the manpower to put together a case that would allow them to take effective action until he had already "slept it off". If he didn't mention the cat, was his side of the story that he simply went off the road for no reason at all?

[PTPD22]

You might want to keep reading down to the (2)(b) paragraph of 811.745. Surely a mailbox on the side of the roadway qualifies as "property other than a vehicle involved in the accident."

[nlt1218]

[QUOTE=Mr. Knowitall;626854]As you can see, ORS 811.700 has no damage threshold.

The police didn't "let him sleep it off" - they presumably didn't have the manpower to put together a case that would allow them to take effective action until he had already "slept it off". If he didn't mention the cat, was his side of the story that he simply went off the road for no reason at all?[/yQUOTE]
No, and there was more to it than that but I don't want to go into too much specific detail online about it. I guess I understand now why they charged him with what they did, however overzealous I think they were. But your explanation doesn't fly. Multiple cops came. Seems interesting that they would wait, and give someone the chance to flee. This county is notorious for arresting for any and everything, hence why they do so much better financially than others.

[Mr. Knowitall]

If you think the police were content to let him sleep it off so that he would only face minor charges, you're entitled to believe that.

[nlt1218]

Yeah, definitely not what I was saying at all. You were insinuating he was not sober and I understood that to mean you thought the cops thinking he was drunk was the reason for the overzealous charges. And when I questioned why they would let him sleep it off if they thought they could get him for a DUI, you said maybe they didn't have enough manpower (which they clearly did). So my argument wasn't that they we're trying to get him on less serious charges. In fact it was quite the opposite. Mr Know it all doesn't know how to read too well. He has an actual attorney now so I'm not going to be back.

[Mr. Knowitall]

The odds that your boyfriend was sober are likely about the same as the odds of your being complimented on your manners.