State v. Guynn

“A person commits the offense of ‘following too closely’ if the person ‘[d]rives a motor vehicle so as to follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon, and condition of, the highway.” ORS 811.485(1)(a). “A driver has the duty [to all cars] to not follow the preceding car so closely as to create an ‘unreasonable risk’ to others under the driving conditions present.” Garland v. Wilcox, 220 Or 325 (1960).

Petitioner appealed a conviction for the violation of “following too closely,” when, in January at 4:30am, she drove a three-mile stretch and repeatedly followed the car in front of her at a distance of only six feet when it was dark and wet on the highway. On appeal, Petitioner asserted that when the statute is properly construed, the evidence is not sufficient to show she violated the statute. “A person commits the offense of ‘following too closely’ if the person ‘[d]rives a motor vehicle so as to follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of the vehicles and the traffic upon, and condition of, the highway.” ORS 811.485(1)(a). “A driver has the duty [to all cars] to not follow the preceding car so closely as to create an ‘unreasonable risk’ to others under the driving conditions present.” Garland v. Wilcox, 220 Or 325 (1960). When viewed in light most favorable to the state, the Court found there was sufficient evidence to permit a rational fact-finder to find the Defendant was driving in such proximity to the other vehicle so as to give rise to an unreasonable risk of collision, under the driving conditions, violating ORS 811.485(1)(a). Affirmed.