Commonwealth v. Enick
70 A.3d 843
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2013Background
- At ~2:38 a.m. on Oct. 18, 2011, Officer Rhyslop observed Grace Enick’s vehicle travel southbound and cross the double yellow centerline for ~2–3 seconds. He initiated a traffic stop a short distance later.
- On contact, officer observed signs of intoxication (odor of alcohol, glassy eyes, slurred speech); Enick later registered .178 BAC in a blood test.
- Enick moved to suppress, arguing the stop was unlawful; the suppression court credited the officer’s testimony and found the stop lawful. The dashboard camera footage did not clearly show the centerline crossing.
- Enick was convicted (bench trial on stipulated facts) of DUI (75 Pa.C.S.A. §3802) and failure to drive on right side of roadway (§3301). Sentence: 90 days house arrest and 18 months probation (stay pending appeal).
- On appeal, Enick argued (1) the record and video did not support the officer’s testimony and (2) a single, brief crossing of the centerline is a momentary/minor deviation insufficient to establish probable cause for a traffic stop.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Enick) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth/Officer) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether record/video supported the trial court’s factual finding that Enick crossed the centerline | Dashboard camera did not depict the crossing; record therefore insufficient to credit officer | Officer testified to direct observation; video was inconclusive and did not undermine testimony | Court upheld the trial court’s credibility finding; record supports stop |
| Whether a single brief crossing of the centerline can supply probable cause for a stop under §3301(a) | A momentary, minor deviation does not create probable cause (citing Gleason/Garcia) | Crossing the double yellow into oncoming traffic—not a mere inches-over fog line—posed a safety hazard and violated §3301(a), supporting probable cause | Court held the single crossing (half the vehicle across for ~3 seconds into oncoming lane) gave probable cause to stop under §3301(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Gleason, 785 A.2d 983 (Pa. 2001) (momentary deviance that did not create a safety hazard insufficient to support stop)
- Commonwealth v. Garcia, 859 A.2d 820 (Pa. Super. 2004) (brief, minor crossing of berm/fog line insufficient for stop)
- Commonwealth v. Carlson, 705 A.2d 468 (Pa. Super. 1998) (single centerline breach did not supply reasonable suspicion for DUI stop; officer lacked statutory authority to stop for summary offense)
- Commonwealth v. Feczko, 10 A.3d 1285 (Pa. Super. 2010) (discussion of reasonable suspicion vs. probable cause for vehicle-code stops)
- Commonwealth v. Lindblom, 854 A.2d 604 (Pa. Super. 2004) (articulation of probable cause standard and balancing privacy interest in vehicle stops)
- Commonwealth v. Chernosky, 874 A.2d 123 (Pa. Super. 2005) (violation of §3301(a) where vehicle crossed double yellow line)