Commonwealth v. Lees, 135 A.3d 185

On August 15, 2014, Alison Lees was charged with two counts of DUI, reckless driving, and careless driving after her vehicle ran over a curb and into a grassy area striking a green electrical box in a private apartment complex parking lot.
Parties stipulated Lees’ BAC was 0.189% within two hours of the incident and that the grassy area she struck was not a “highway” or “trafficway.”
The parking lot serving Evergreen Point and Montgomery Village displayed a “Private Property” sign but was routinely used by mail carriers, delivery drivers, and visitors.
Lees produced a declaration document and an unsigned “Proposed Amendments” purporting to reserve one parking space per homeowner; the deed did not reference any specific assigned parking space and the amendments were not adopted.
The trial court granted Lees habeas corpus relief and dismissed the charges; the Commonwealth appealed, arguing the parking lot (or at least the space Lees occupied) was a “trafficway” under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 102.
The Superior Court reviewed whether the Commonwealth presented a prima facie case that Lees committed DUI on a highway or trafficway and reversed the dismissal, remanding for further proceedings.

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Lees' Argument	Held
Whether the parking space/lot is a “highway” or “trafficway” under the Motor Vehicle Code	The parking lot is open to public use by right or custom and thus qualifies as a trafficway; Commonwealth established prima facie case	Distinguishes private assigned parking space from the parking lot generally; grassy area (where impact occurred) is not a trafficway	The lot served both complexes and was regularly used by the public; viewed favorably to Commonwealth, evidence sufficed to establish a prima facie case that incident occurred on a trafficway; reversal of habeas relief
Whether Commonwealth proved Lees had a right or claim to a reserved parking space	Lees’ asserted ownership of a particular space is unclear; deed contains no reserved-space grant; proposed amendments not adopted	Lees claimed entitlement to spaces (ambiguous), relied on declarations and proposed amendments	Court found ownership/assignment of the specific space unclear and unnecessary to defeat habeas relief because public use of the lot supported trafficway status

Commonwealth v. Patrick, 933 A.2d 1043 (en banc Pa. Super. 2007) (prima facie standard for habeas corpus dismissal in criminal cases)
Commonwealth v. Zabierowsky, 730 A.2d 987 (Pa. Super. 1999) (parking garage constituted public use for trafficway analysis)
Commonwealth v. Wilson, 553 A.2d 452 (Pa. Super. 1989) (parking lot used by public is a trafficway for DUI purposes)
Commonwealth v. Cameron, 668 A.2d 1163 (Pa. Super. 1995) (apartment-adjacent parking lot can be a trafficway)
Commonwealth v. Wyland, 987 A.2d 802 (Pa. Super. 2010) (restricted military base road was not a trafficway where public access was not by right or custom)
Commonwealth v. Johnson, 833 A.2d 260 (Pa. Super. 2003) (definition of “operate” for DUI includes actual physical control of vehicle)