Comments (43) | Add a comment
Woman pleads guilty to DUI resulting in death
-
19-YEAR-OLD FACES TWO TO 40 YEARS IN PRISON AFTER PLEADING GUILTY TO DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE RESULTING IN DEATH.
Anita Mann
19-year-old faces two to 40 years in prison after pleading guilty to driving under the influence resulting in death.
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
Updated: Apr. 7, 2010 | 7:53 a.m.
A 19-year-old woman accused of causing a crash that killed two people in February pleaded guilty Tuesday to two counts of driving under the influence resulting in death.
Anita Mann faces two to 40 years in prison. A sentencing hearing was scheduled for June 8 before District Judge Valorie Vega.
Authorities said that Mann had a blood alcohol level of 0.26 percent, more than three times the legal limit of 0.08, when the car she was driving slammed into the rear of a sport utility vehicle on Feb. 16. Killed were Henderson residents Karen Hicks and Louis Madden, both 65.
On Tuesday, when Vega asked her if she was guilty of the crimes alleged by prosecutors, Mann, a soldier with the Nevada Army National Guard, said, "Yes, your honor."
After the hearing, Madden's sister, Sylvia Pierce, said she was happy Mann pleaded guilty. "I just want it to be over," Pierce said. "It's very hard to keep coming here to court."
Mann's attorney, Steve Wolfson, did not comment after the hearing but earlier had said that his client wished to take responsibility for what she had done.
As part of the plea agreement prosecutors will not speak at the sentencing hearing. Family members of the victims are expected to address the court at that time.
According to her arrest report, after the crash Mann told Henderson police with slurred speech that she had been drinking, was drunk and should be taken to jail.
The crash occurred about 11:40 a.m. on Horizon Ridge Parkway at Shaded Canyon Drive, near Gibson Road.
According to grand jury testimony, Mann told investigators she had been drinking rum at a park before the crash.
Mann is being held at the Clark County Detention Center on $240,000 bond, according to jail records.
Contact reporter Francis McCabe at fmccabe@reviewjournal.com or 702-380-1039.
Trending topics:
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
The following is for informational or clarification purposes only.
Since this event occurred, I have heard people calling for the death penalty or life in prison. Obviously, that's not going to happen, that is not the punishment for this crime, nor should it be.
Others, including myself, have quoted 2 to 20 years for each count, so there would be a range of 2 to 40 years. 2-2 year sentences, if concurrent, would be 2 years. 2-20 year sentences would be 40 years if consecutive. As I said, I too believed this, was the case, when I said it. Turns out, I was wrong.
Through communication with the DA's office, concerning this case, I received the following explanation concerning the actual sentencing possible.
DA's office explanation:
"Although a maximum of 20 years is possible for each charge, the legislature's "truth in sentencing" bill, passed over a decade ago, limits the minimum term to no more than 40% of the maximum sentence, or 2 to 8 years in this case."
So, the real range is 2 to 16 years for both counts. 2-2 year sentences, if concurrent, would be 2 years. 2-8 year sentences would be 16 years if consecutive.
Since I had said it was 2 to 20 in earlier posts, I wanted to clarify it, now that I have new information.
John,
As I understand it, the who provided the alcohol, came out in the Grand Jury. NRS 172.245, section 2, prohibits disclosure of evidence presented during the proceedings.
Anyone that knows, that was not part of the Grand Jury, investigation can say, what happened, but if they were at the event and did nothing to stop her, they would probably stay quiet.
Even without a legal obligation to stop her, there was a moral obligation to stop her. But, who's to say they didn't try to stop her, trying to reason with someone that's drunk, is often a losing battle.
You said, "If an adult bought the booze, they need to be in the next to hers." She is over 18, so she is an adult, she quite possibly bought the booze also.
The criminal action against the person(s) providing the alcohol would be a misdemeanor, NRS 202.055, so they would not be going to jail, to be in a cell next to her.
You mention the bar being sued. I'm not sure Nevada has a Dram Shot law, like California, because of the bars and casinos getting more gambling from drunk patrons. Plus it brings up the personal-responsibility issue. I'm in no way saying, there won't be a lawsuit over this, I would bet there will be.
The alcohol was not the problem, it could have stayed in the bottle and nothing would have happened.
She made the decision to drink, extremely and excessively, then driving, then having one accident and fleeing it, to have a second collision that killed two people.
They have the right person.
How come no answers to who provided the booze and action against them?
If a bar serves an obvious drunk and they kill someone, the bar will be sued. She was not a little toasted, she was beyond fried - someone had to know she was drunk when she kept drinking. If an adult bought the booze, they need to be in the cell next to hers.