Com. v. Carothers, C., Jr., Com. v. Carothers, C., Jr. No. 1388 MDA 2016

On May 2, 2015, Charles Carothers was stopped, suspected of DUI, arrested, read the DL-26 implied consent form, and refused a blood sample.
Commonwealth charged him with two DUI counts (one for refusal), fleeing police, and speeding; he later pled guilty to DUI and recklessly endangering another person on March 24, 2016.
On June 27, 2016, Carothers filed a pre‑sentence motion to withdraw his guilty plea; the trial court held an evidentiary hearing and denied the motion on July 26, 2016, then sentenced him to 6–12 months imprisonment plus 18 months’ probation.
At the withdrawal hearing, Carothers testified that he wished to withdraw because the plea impeded his ability to obtain commercial truck‑driving employment; he offered no employer testimony or documentary proof.
The trial court found Carothers’ extensive prior criminal record (multiple serious convictions from 1994–2011) explained his employment difficulties, not the DUI plea.
The Superior Court affirmed, concluding the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the pre‑sentence withdrawal request and therefore did not address the conditional second issue regarding Birchfield motions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying pre‑sentence withdrawal of the guilty plea	Commonwealth: trial court properly applied Rule 591 and fairness/justice standard; denial appropriate given record	Carothers: plea should be withdrawn because collateral consequences (inability to secure truck‑driving jobs) provide a fair and just reason	Denied — court found no fair and just reason; prior convictions (not the plea) explained employment issues and appellant offered only self‑serving testimony
Whether, if withdrawal were permitted, Carothers could have filed pretrial motions to challenge DUI under Birchfield v. North Dakota	Commonwealth: not reached because withdrawal denial was proper	Carothers: would have sought to move to dismiss DUI charges post‑Birchfield	Not reached — appellate court did not address because it affirmed denial of withdrawal

Islas v. Commonwealth, 156 A.3d 1185 (Pa. Super. 2017) (standard of review for pre‑sentence plea withdrawal)
Kpou v. Commonwealth, 153 A.3d 1020 (Pa. Super. 2016) (pre‑sentence withdrawal should be liberally allowed)
Elia v. Commonwealth, 83 A.3d 254 (Pa. Super. 2013) (test for withdrawal is fairness and justice)
Carrasquillo v. Commonwealth, 115 A.3d 1284 (Pa. 2015) (defendant must show fair and just reason absent substantial prejudice to Commonwealth)
Biesecker v. Commonwealth, 161 A.3d 321 (Pa. Super. 2017) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard explained)
Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (2016) (constitutional limits on warrantless blood tests)