237 Pa. Super. 473 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1975
Opinion by
Appellant was found guilty of violation of Section 903 (a) of The Vehicle Code,
The facts are not in dispute and may be very briefly summarized as follows: On February 19, 1974, appellant was cited by Corporal Ray Antram of the Pennsylvania State Police for violation of Section 903. At the time of the incident, Corporal Antram was driving a marked State Police car and was wearing the traditional gray uniform that so readily identifies an officer of the Pennsylvania State Police. In addition, the corporal had shoulder patches and a name plate on the uniform, and he was also wearing the standard hat with official insignia. He was not wearing his badge, as that is not required by State Police Regulations. This appeal raises the sole question of whether there were sufficient “other sign[s]
It is fundamental that the object of all interpretations and constructions of laws is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.
The obvious intention of the legislature in enacting Sections 903 and 904 is to control the gross weight of vehicles operating on Pennsylvania’s highways. Society has a legitimate interest in this regulation in an effort to save lives and avoid property damage. An overloaded vehicle is more difficult to control, thus the chances of an accident are increased, and road surfaces and underground pipes are often damaged by the excessive weight placed on them. Also, the intention of the legislature in requiring a badge or other sign of authority is to enable the motorist to be as certain as possible that the person who stops him is, in fact, a police officer.
We must assume that the legislature does not use superfluous language in a statute, Baumer Motor Vehicle Operator License Case, 212 Pa. Superior Ct. 372, 243 A.2d 472 (1968). In addition, all penal provisions of a law shall be strictly construed,
Appellant relies on two lower court cases
Appellant agrees that the purpose of the requirement of the badge or other sign of authority is to insure that motorists are not victimized by bogus police officers. He contends that the badge or identification card is the only positive means by which an operator of a motor vehicle can be certain that he is dealing with a bona fide State Police Officer. Reduced to its most essential terms, this argument is that uniforms, hats, shoulder patches, name plates, official insignia, and even marked police cars can be convincingly counterfeited, but that the badge and identification card cannot.
Applying a liberal interpretation to the phrase “other sign of authority,” we conclude that this requirement is satisfied by any indicia evidencing a State Police Officer. The hat, official insignia, shoulder patches, name plate, or marked police car are all sufficient to put the motorist on notice that he is dealing with a duly sworn State Police Officer. The total effect belies any doubt as to the authority of the officer.
While we express no opinion as to cases dealing with local police forces, we hold that a uniformed State Police Officer, wearing hat, official insignia, name plate, and shoulder patches exhibits sufficient other signs of authority to satisfy the goals of the statute and the intention of the legislature.
Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Hoffman, Cercone, and Spaeth, JJ., concur in the result.
. Act of March 3, 1970, P.L. 88, No. 39, §13 (75 P.S. §903), as amended, Act of Nov. 28, 1973, P.L. 346, No. 120, §2.
. Act of Aug. 27, 1965, P.L. 418, §1 (75 P.S. §904), as amended, Act of Aug. 27,1965, P.L. 416, §1.
. Act of Dec. 6, 1972, P.L. 1339, No. 290, §3 (1 Pa.C.S. §1921).
. Act of Dec. 6,1972, P.L. 1339, No. 290, §3 (1 Pa.C.S. §1922).
. Act of Dec. 6,1972, P.L. 1339, No. 290, §3 (1 Pa.C.S. §1928).
. Act of Dec. 6,1972, P.L. 1339, No. 290, §3 (1 Pa.C.S. §1928).
. Commonwealth v. John Thomas Marshall, September Term, Cambria County (1972); Commonwealth v. Smith, 81 D. & C. 543 (1952).