Rawson v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
2014 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 428
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | 2014Background
- Rawson pled guilty to criminal attempt to possess a controlled substance; the clerk of courts erroneously reported a Drug Act conviction on a DL-21D form.
- The Department suspended Rawson’s driving privileges based on the inaccurate Conviction Report (DL-21D) indicating possession.
- The criminal court later issued an order striking the Conviction Report as a legal nullity, but the Department did not rescind the suspension.
- A certified sentencing sheet, showing a conviction for criminal attempt, was introduced and is a proper record of conviction.
- The DL-21D form is imperfect and the Department may rely on certified conviction records other than the DL-21D to prove the underlying conviction.
- The court affirmed the suspension based on the certified sentencing sheet and the broader statutory interpretation of Section 1532(c).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Conviction Report was admissible evidence. | Rawson | Rawson objected to admissibility; Department relied on the Conviction Report. | Admissible for limited purpose; did not determine the conviction itself. |
| Whether a criminal attempt conviction qualifies as a license-suspending offense under §1532(c). | Rawson | Department argued it is an offense involving possession. | Yes, attempt to possess qualifies; suspension mandated. |
| Whether the certified sentencing sheet suffices to establish conviction. | Rawson | Department may rely on certified records. | Certified sentencing sheet sufficient; DL-21D’s inaccuracy did not bar suspension. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sivak v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 9 A.3d 247 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2010) (court may rely on actual conviction despite form inaccuracies)
- Glidden v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 962 A.2d 9 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (prima facie case requires official conviction record; form may be imperfect)
- Conchado v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 941 A.2d 792 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (inchoate offenses may trigger suspension where appropriate)
- Keim v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 887 A.2d 834 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005) (expands interpretation of ‘involving’ possession to include broader offenses)
- Coyle v. Dep’t of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 971 A.2d 532 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (statute construed broadly to include possession-related offenses)