Commonwealth v. Feczko
10 A.3d 1285
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2010Background
- At ~10:00 p.m. on Aug. 19, 2008, Trooper Miller saw Appellant's Cadillac weave and cross lane lines on SR 174.
- Appellant's vehicle crossed the double yellow line twice and drifted over the white fog line, creating a safety concern.
- Trooper Miller stopped the vehicle, stating the basis was reasonable suspicion of weaving within the lane and crossing lines.
- After the stop, Miller detected odor of alcohol, red/glassy eyes, and slurred speech; Appellant failed a breathalyzer and had .174 BAC.
- Appellant was charged with DUI-General Impairment, DUI-Highest Rate, and Driving on Roadways Laned for Traffic; motion to suppress denied.
- A bench trial followed; Appellant was convicted on all counts and sentenced; appeal challenged the stop as lacking reasonable suspicion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Miller have the requisite cause to stop the vehicle? | Feczko | Commonwealth | Stop upheld; probable cause to violate 3309(1) |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Chase, 960 A.2d 108 (Pa. 2008) (limits on reasonable suspicion; Terry framework applies to vehicle stops)
- Commonwealth v. Whitmyer, 668 A.2d 1113 (Pa. 1995) (articulable and reasonable grounds equated with probable cause under old §6308(b))
- Commonwealth v. Gleason, 785 A.2d 983 (Pa. 2001) (probable cause standard for non-investigatable Vehicle Code stops)
- Commonwealth v. Murray, 331 A.2d 414 (Pa. 1975) ( Terry/Adams framework; needs articulable facts for investigatory stops; probable cause for Vehicle Code stops)
- Commonwealth v. Sands, 887 A.2d 261 (Pa. Super. 2005) (DUI stops can be investigatory; reasonable suspicion sufficient for DUI stops under 6308(b))