Com. v. Faber, E.
339 MDA 2016
Pa. Super. Ct.Nov 21, 2016Background
- On December 8, 2015, a vehicle struck a light pole at Wilkes‑Barre Boulevard and Scott Street, leaving debris and blocking northbound lanes; police and fire units positioned vehicles with lights on to block the roadway and direct traffic.
- Officers Magagna and Kane stood in the roadway and yelled directions to redirect traffic; a raised median separated the lanes.
- Appellant Eberhard Faber approached in an eastbound turning lane, drove over the median, bypassed parked police and a fire truck, and entered the northbound lane where responders were present, narrowly avoiding striking them.
- Officers testified Faber ignored verbal commands and that his conduct put responders in danger; Faber testified he mistakenly believed police had stopped another driver and that he had to continue until he could cross the median.
- Faber pled guilty in district court but appealed for a trial de novo; after a summary appeal hearing on February 10, 2016, the trial court convicted him of reckless driving and imposed a fine; the Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence was sufficient to prove reckless driving (willful/wanton disregard) | Commonwealth: testimony established Faber consciously disregarded police directives and emergency apparatus, drove over median, and created substantial risk to responders | Faber: lacked requisite mens rea; he mistakenly thought police had stopped another driver and did not act with wanton disregard | Affirmed: evidence sufficient; court credited Commonwealth witnesses and found conduct showed conscious disregard and substantial risk |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 874 A.2d 108 (Pa. Super. 2005) (standard for sufficiency review and deference to fact‑finder)
- Commonwealth v. Bullick, 830 A.2d 998 (Pa. Super. 2003) (elements of reckless driving: actus reus and mens rea)
- Commonwealth v. Greenberg, 885 A.2d 1025 (Pa. Super. 2005) (reckless driving requires gross departure from prudent driving and conscious disregard creating substantial risk)
- Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745 (Pa. 2000) (framework for sufficiency review; believable evidence must support verdict)
- Commonwealth v. Ratsamy, 934 A.2d 1233 (Pa. 2007) (evidence sufficiency principles)
- Commonwealth v. Jeter, 937 A.2d 466 (Pa. Super. 2007) (examples of tangible indicia of reckless driving and mens rea analysis)