Question

Chap 6 2. As an intoxicated driver recklessly drove his vehicle into a car being driven by a woman who was seven months pregnant. As a result of the accident, the woman's baby was born prematurely, suffered from extensive brain damage, and died two days later. The state law defines a person as an individual "who has been born and is alive." Nevertheless, the state prosecuted the intoxicated driver, and a jury found him guilty of manslaughter. Do you think an appellate court should uphold the defendant's conviction? Why or Why not?

Answer 1

No, I don't think so appellate court should uphold convictions of defendant because-

Vehicular murder is the unintended slaughtering of an individual submitted via the interest of a car, plane, speedboat or other engine car in a way which makes an absurd danger of damage to the character or property of any other and which establishes a cloth deviation from the standard of care which a sensible man or woman might see beneath comparable conditions. Numerous states have picked to set up vehicular homicide as a lawful offense.

("Vehicular murder" is the executing of an man or woman, or the slaughtering of a suitable hatchling through any injury to the mother, added about through the activity of an engine car by any other in a wild way liable to reason the demise of, or outstanding real mischief to, another.

-I receive the infant changed into introduced into the arena rashly because of the impact of the mishap and the redrafting court ought to maintain the respondent's conviction. In the occasion that the hatchling changed into a feasible embryo.

Thank you