Com. v. Washington, F.
Com. v. Washington, F. No. 2821 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | May 26, 2017Background
- On Aug. 1, 2015, Corporal Jonathan Shave stopped Frank Washington’s vehicle after it failed to move when a traffic light turned green; the vehicle was blocking traffic.
- When Shave exited his patrol car he smelled a strong odor of PCP coming from the vehicle and from a cigarette Washington held (smoked down to the filter).
- Washington appeared emotional, cried, gave delayed or no responses to some questions, and was unsteady when exiting the vehicle; Shave requested backup and handcuffed Washington.
- Shave arrested Washington for driving under the influence of a controlled substance (PCP); he searched Washington incident to arrest (finding a bag later identified as cocaine) and performed an inventory search of the vehicle before towing it (finding marijuana and an open bottle of tequila).
- Washington moved to suppress the evidence, arguing lack of probable cause for the DUI arrest; the trial court denied suppression, a jury convicted Washington of possession offenses, and the Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Washington) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officer had probable cause to arrest for DUI based on odor and behavior | Shave had probable cause: strong odor of PCP, cigarette smelling of PCP, Washington’s delayed responses, crying, and unsteady gait supported belief he was under the influence | Officer lacked probable cause; the trial court’s factual findings were unsupported, so arrest (and subsequent searches) were unlawful | Arrest was supported by probable cause given totality of circumstances; suppression properly denied |
| Whether search incident to arrest was lawful | Search incident to a lawful arrest is permitted; contraband found on person admissible | Search invalid if arrest lacked probable cause | Search incident to lawful arrest was valid and evidence admissible |
| Whether inventory search of vehicle was lawful | Vehicle lawfully impounded (blocking roadway); inventory search followed department policy, so items found admissible | Inventory was pretextual and thus unlawful | Inventory search lawful because vehicle was towed under statutory/policy grounds and search followed standard procedures |
| Whether officer’s failure to administer field sobriety tests undermines probable cause | Tests not required; officer’s training and observations sufficed to form probable cause and to handcuff for officer safety | Failure to test means no reliable basis for DUI arrest | Failure to administer tests did not negate probable cause; handcuffing and arrest reasonable under circumstances |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Dommel, 885 A.2d 998 (Pa. Super. 2005) (totality of circumstances governs probable-cause determination)
- In re C.C.J., 799 A.2d 116 (Pa. Super. 2002) (definition of probable cause to arrest)
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 121 A.3d 524 (Pa. Super. 2015) (odor of burnt marijuana from vehicle supports chemical testing/probable cause)
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 568 A.2d 1281 (Pa. Super. 1990) (search incident to lawful arrest doctrine)
- Commonwealth v. Hennigan, 753 A.2d 245 (Pa. Super. 2000) (standards and purposes for inventory searches)