The California Court of Appeal recently ruled that a conviction for driving under the influence (DUI) is not a lesser included offense of gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated. This decision, made on August 24, 2026, affects how DUI cases will be prosecuted in California, particularly those involving fatalities. The ruling clarifies the legal landscape for defendants facing multiple charges stemming from the same incident.
The case, known as People v. Lossing (Docket No. B347919), centers around Dylan River Lossing, who, at the age of 20, was involved in a fatal car crash while driving under the influence of alcohol. The crash resulted in the death of another driver. Lossing faced multiple charges, including gross vehicular manslaughter and two counts of DUI. After pleading no contest to all charges, he was sentenced to prison.
The dispute arose when Lossing argued that one of his DUI convictions should be dismissed as a lesser included offense of gross vehicular manslaughter. He claimed that if the DUI conviction were dismissed, he could avoid certain penalties related to his sentence, including limitations on his custodial work time credits. However, the prosecution contended that a DUI conviction could exist independently of a gross vehicular manslaughter conviction, thus not qualifying as a lesser included offense.
The court's opinion addressed a split in authority regarding whether a DUI conviction under California Vehicle Code section 23153 is a lesser included offense of gross vehicular manslaughter under Penal Code section 191.5. The court had previously held that the DUI charge could be considered lesser when the crimes involved the same victim. However, in this ruling, the court reversed that position, stating, "We now hold that Vehicle Code section 23153 is not a lesser included offense of section 191.5. We affirm." This decision was made by Judge McKaig, with concurrence from Judges Yegan and Baltodano.
The court explained that the judicially-created exception, which typically allows for the dismissal of lesser included offenses, does not apply in this case. It emphasized that a crime is only considered lesser included if it is impossible to violate the greater offense without also violating the lesser. Since gross vehicular manslaughter can be established through other means, such as violations of different sections of the Vehicle Code, the court ruled that the DUI conviction does not meet the criteria for dismissal.
This ruling has significant implications for future DUI cases in California. It clarifies that defendants can face multiple convictions for DUI and gross vehicular manslaughter arising from the same incident without the need to dismiss one of the charges. This decision reinforces the principle that multiple convictions can coexist as long as the elements of the offenses differ sufficiently.
Furthermore, the ruling sets a precedent that may influence how similar cases are handled in the future, particularly concerning the application of sentencing enhancements and the accrual of work time credits for incarcerated individuals. The court noted that concerns about duplicative punishment could be addressed through existing legal frameworks, rather than requiring the dismissal of convictions.
As for what comes next, it remains unclear if Lossing will appeal this decision. The court's ruling does not appear to leave room for further legal challenge on the grounds presented in this case. However, it may open the door for related cases to be examined under the clarified legal standards established by this ruling.