149 A.3d 71
Pa. Super. Ct.2016Background
- Commonwealth appeals suppression order and habeas relief termination of prosecution.
- Suppression hearing held June 3, 2015; only witness was Corporal O’Donnell.
- December 14, 2013, ~8:00 PM; snowy conditions on Route 61, Berks County.
- O’Donnell observed Vetter’s car stopped in travel lanes with door open and Vetter partially outside, appearing to urinate.
- Video evidence showed vehicle largely off the roadway, not in travel lane, and visible to other drivers.
- Suppression court found no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to stop under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3351; Commonwealth appeal followed; Superior Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the encounter was a mere encounter or a seizure | Vetter’s conduct and officer duty to assist disabled motorists justified a stop. | There was no seizure; stop based on a traffic violation and possible disorderly conduct. | Not a mere encounter; there was a stop supported by probable cause or reasonable suspicion. |
| Whether there was reasonable suspicion to stop for disorderly conduct | Urination observed in a roadway area supported disorderly conduct suspicion. | Public urination is not shown as sufficient basis for disorderly conduct; stop based on 3351. | Disorderly conduct not established; stop not supported by reasonable suspicion. |
| Waiver and viability of disorderly conduct issue on appeal | Disorderly conduct argument preserved for appeal. | Issue waived under Pa.R.A.P. 302(a) for not raised below. | Waived; or, alternatively, not prevailingly supported. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Miller, 56 A.3d 1276 (Pa. Super. 2012) (standard for reviewing suppression orders; findings of fact binding, law reviewable)
- Commonwealth v. Salter, 121 A.3d 987 (Pa. Super. 2015) (necessary for determining whether stop requires probable cause or reasonable suspicion)
- Commonwealth v. Strickler, 757 A.2d 884 (Pa. 2000) (footnote discussion on public urination as predicate for disorderly conduct)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 568 A.2d 1281 (Pa. Super. 1990) (public urination discussion in disorderly conduct context)
- Commonwealth v. Barber, 889 A.2d 587 (Pa. Super. 2005) (reasonable suspicion discussion; caution against overreaching disorderly conduct claims)
- Commonwealth v. Maerz, 879 A.2d 1267 (Pa. Super. 2005) (limits on disorderly conduct scope; emphasis on public peace)