Proving Reckless Driving Violation In Delaware

The State has the burden of proving each and every element of 21 Del. C. 4175 (Reckless driving violation) beyond a reasonable doubt. 11 Del. C. 301, State v. Matushefske, Del. Supr., 215 A.2d 443 (1965). As established case law indicates, a reasonable doubt is not a "vague, whimsical or merely possible doubt, but such a doubt as intelligent, reasonable, and impartial men may honestly entertain after a conscious consideration of the case." Matushefske, 215 A.2d at 444. A reasonable doubt means a "substantial well-founded doubt arising from a candid and impartial consideration of all the evidence or want of evidence." State v. Wright, Del. Gen. Sess., 79 A. 399 (1911). the State has proven in this record jurisdiction and venue beyond a reasonable doubt. 11 Del. C. 232. Case law provides that in order for a defendant's conduct to be in "willful or wanton disregard of the rights of others" the conduct must "reflect a conscious indifference" or "I don't care" attitude which is the prerequisite of wanton behavior. Foster v. Shropshrie, Del. Supr., 375 A.2d 458, 461 (1977); McHugh v. Brown, Del. Supr., 125 A.2d 583 (1956).