The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-5289RANDALL CARL VATHIS, Petitioner COMMONWEALTH OF PA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,. Respondent : AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. DRIVERS LICENSE APPEAL MOTION FOR HEARING day of October 2002, the Petitioner, Randall Carl Vathis, by and through his attorney, Austin F. Grogan, Esq., avers the following: 1. On or about October 10, 2002 the Petitioner, Randall Carl Vathis, received a Notice of License Suspension indicating the requirement to install a Guardian Interlock on his vehicle as the result of a DUI conviction on March 9, 2002 (copy of Notice attached); 2. The mail date of the Notice is October I0, 2002. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests this Honorable Court to schedule a Hearing to dispute the requirement to install a Guardian Interlock on the vehicle. Respectfully submitted, Date ~°/z X/o-t-- Austin F. GrogS, Eauir~/ 24 North 32nd Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 737-1956 Attorney for Petitioner I.D.//59020 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bureau of Driver Licensing Mail Date: OCTOBER 10, 2002 RANDALL CARL VATHIS 1413 SILVERCREEK DR MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 WID ~ 022766112328055 001 PROCESSING DATE 10/03/2002 DRIVER LICENSE # 15389992 DATE OF BIRTH 02/29/1952 Dear MR. VATHIS: LICENSE IN BUREAU This is an O~icial Notice o4 the Susmension of your Driving Privilege as authorized by Section 1532B of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code. As a result of Your 06/18/2002 conviction of violating Section $731 of the Vehicle Code DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE on 03/09/2002: Your driving Privilege is SUSPENDED ~oP a Pepiod o4 1 YEAR(S) e~ective 09/2q/2003 at 12:01 a.m. WARNING: If You are convicted of driving while Your license is suspended/revoked the Penalties will be a MINIMUM of 90 days imprisonment AND a 91,000 fine AND your driving privilege will be suspended/revoked for a MINIMUM 1 year Period This suspension is in addition to any other suspensions already on Your record. ?RISON RELEASE REQUIREMENT (ACT151) The Court of CUMBERLAND CTY, Court Number 660, Court Term 2002 has sentenced You to serve a prison term for this violation. Pursuant to Section 15ql(a.1) of the Vehicle Code, You will not receive credit for this suspension/revocation or any additional suspension/revocation until You complete your prison term. The Court must certify Your completion to PennDOT. You may wish to contact Your probation officer and/or the Court after your release to make sure that PennDOT is properly notified. 022766112328055 IGNITION INTERLOCK Before your driving Privilege can be restored you are required by law to have all vehicle(s) owned by You to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock SYstem. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege will remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information approximately 30 days before PROVIDING PROOF OF INSURANCF Within the last 30 days of regarding this requirement your eligibility date. will send you a letter asking that you provide proof of insurance at that time. This letter will list acceptable documents and what will be needed if you do not own a vehicle registered in Pennsylvania. ImpoPtant: Please make sure that PennDOT is notified if You move from your current address. You may notify PennDOT of your address change by calling any of the phone numbers listed at the end of this letter. APPEAL You have the right to appeai this action to the Court of Common Pieas (Civii Division) within 30 days of the maii date, OCTOBER 10, 2002, of this letter. Zf you file an appeal in the County Court, the Court will give you a time-stamped certified copy of the appeal. In order for Your appeal to be valid, you must send this time-stamped certified copy of the appeal by certified mail to: Pennsylvania Department of TransPortation Office of Chief Counsel Third Floor, Riverfront Office Center Harrisburg, PA 17104-2516 Remember, this is an OFFXCIAL NOT~C£ OF SUSPENSION. Sincerely, Rebecca L. Bickley, Director Bureau of Driver Licensing 022766112328055 INFORMATION 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. IN STATE 1-800-952-4600 TDD IN STATE OUT-OF-STATE 717-391-6190 TDD OUT-OF-STATE WEB SITE ADDRESS www.dot.state.pa.us 1-800-228-0676' 717-391-619I RANDALL CARL VATHIS, Petitioner : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. : NO. (Da '~ .~/~.J:~' Col . COMMONWEALTH OF PA : DRIVERS LICENSE APPEAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,: Respondent : ORDER AND NOW, this '7t/~ day of ~/~~ 2002, upon consideration of the attached Motion, a Hearing is scheduled for the /~ day of Ql~.cca. a~ 200~ in Courtroom c/ at//):30m at the Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania. BY THE COURT, / RANDALL CARL VATHIS, · Appellant ' IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA vs. : 02-5289 CIVIL : COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA, : DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, : BUREAU OF DRIVER : LICENSING, : Appellee : CIVIL ACTION - LAW LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL ORDER AND NOW, this t q'n day of February, 2003, on the appeal of Randall Vathis is SUSTAINED with respect to that portion of his driver's license; suspension which reads as follows: Ignition Interlock Before your driving privilege can be restored you are required by law to have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege will remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before your eligibility date. Said provision of appellant's suspension is VACATED. See Albert Schneider v. Com. of PA, Dept. of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 11513 C.D. 2001 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002). The appeal with regard to the remaining provisions of the driver's license suspension is DENIED and said suspension may be reinstated. BY THE COURT, Austin Grogan, Esquire For the Appellant George Kabusk, Esquire For PennDOT :rlm 02-1q-o.._% COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT O F TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL VEHICLE & TRAFFIC LAW DIVISION BY: TERRANCE M. EDWARDS ASSISTANT COUNSEL APPELLATE SECTION ATTORNEY IDENTIFICATION NO. 25231 RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER - THIRD FLOOR 1101 SOUTH FRONT STREET HARR/SBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17104-2516 1~717) 787-2830 RANDALL C. VATHIS, Appellee VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Appellant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 02.-5289 Civil Term Notice of Apoeal Notice is hereby given that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, hereby appeals to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania from the order that was filed in this matter on February 14, 2003. This order is from a statutory appeal and cannot be reduced to judgment. The order has been entered in the docket and notice of its entry has been given under Pa. R.C.P. 236. A copy of the docket entries are attached hereto. TERRANCE M. EDWARDS Assistant Counsel Appellate Section Riverside Office Center - Third Floor 1101 South Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17104-2516 (717) 787-2830 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT O F TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL VEHICLE & TRAFFIC LAW DIVISION BY: TERRANCE M. EDWARDS ASSISTANT COUNSEL APPELLATE SECTION ATTORNEY IDENTIFICATION NO. 25231 RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER - THIRD FLOOR 1101 SOUTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17104-2516 (717) 787-2830 RANDALL C. VATHIS, Appellee VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Appellant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 02-5289 Civil Term Request for Transcript A notice of appeal having been filed in this matter, the official court reporter is hereby requested to produce, certify and file the transcript in this matter in conformity with Pa. R.A.P. 1922. Prepare only the original for inclusion in the record as the Appellant, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, does not desire a copy of the transcript. TERRANCE M. EDWARDS Assistant Counsel Appellate Section Riverside Office Center - Third Floor 1101 South Front Street H~m'isburg, Pennsylvania 17104-2516 (717) 787-2830 PYS510 2002-05289 Reference No..: Case Type ..... : APPEAL - Judgmen~ ...... Judge Assigned: Disposed Desc.: Cumberland County Prothonotary,s Office Civil Case Inquiry VATHIS RANDALL CARL (rs) PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF Filed ........ : LICENSE SUSP Time ......... : .00 Execution Date Page 1 10/31/2002 3:38 0/00/0000 Jury Trial .... Disposed Date. 0/00/0000 ............ Case Comments ............. Higher Crt 1.: Higher Crt 2.: General Index Attorney Info GROGAN AUSTIN F VATHIS RANDALL CARL PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL 3RD FL RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER HARRISBURG PA 17104 APPELLANT APPELLEE 11/Ol/2OO2 11/07/2002 * Date Entries * ~******~************************************************************************ ............. FIRST ENTRY' - ......... APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVERS LICENSE .... .......... 1/13 03 IN CR 4 AT 10-30 AM AT THE CUMB ED FOR 2/14/2003 ORDER - DATED 2/14/03 VATHIS - IS SUSTAINED - SAID PROVISION OF APPELLANT'S SUSPENSION - IN RE LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL OF RANDALL IS VACATED - BY THE COURT KEVIN A HESS J COPIES MAILED .............. LAST ENTRY .............. *****~******~************************~**~*************************************~ Escrow Information * Fees & Debits Beg Bal Pymts/Adj End Bal *****~**************************~********~******~******************************* APPEAL LIC SUSP 35.00 35.00 .00 TAX ON APPEAL .50 .50 .00 SETTLEMENT 5.00 5.00 .00 AUTOMATION FEE 5.00 5.00 .00 JCP FEE 5.00 5.00 .00 50.50 50.50 .00 *******~**********~******~************************~**~************************** * End of Case Information ***~************************~***************************************~*********** TRUE COPY FROM RECORD tn Testimony ~hereof, I here u~o set my ~r~l the s~l ol ~ Cou~ a; ~. Pa. r ..... COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT O F TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL VEHICLE & TRAFFIC LAW DIVISION BY: TERRANCE M. EDWARDS ASSISTANT COUNSEL APPELLATE SECTION ATTORNEY IDENTIFICATION NO. 25231 RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER - THIRD FLOOR 1101 SOUTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17104-2516 (717) 787-2830 RANDALL C. VATHIS, Appellee VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Appellant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA NO. 02-5289 Civil Term Proof of Service I hereby certify that I have on this day and date duly served a true and correct copy of the foregoing documents upon the persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of Pa. R.A.P. 121: First Class Mail; Postage Pre-Paid; Addressed as Follows: Judge Kevin A. Hess Cumberland County Courthouse 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 Court Reporter Cumberland County Courthouse 1 Courthouse Square Carlisle, PA 17013 Austin F. Grogan, Esquire Att. for Appellee Vathis 24 North 32nd Street Camp Hill, PA 17011 DANA M. BRESSLER Appellate Paralegal for Vehicle & Traffic Law Division Date: February 24, 2003 GEORGIANNA BRAUND (formerly SWANK), Petitioner VS. COM. OF PA., DEPT. OF TRANS. BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent RANDALL CARL VATHIS, Petitioner VS. COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 02-5246 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW · LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTy, PENNSYLVANIA 02-5289 CIVIL ¢/// CIVIL ACTION - LAW LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL JOHN RICHWINE, Petitioner VS. COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPT. OF TRANS., BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent MICHAEL J. HEIN, Petitioner VS. COM. OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTy, PENNSYLVANIA 02-5406 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTy, PENNSYLVANIA 02-5000 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION - LAW LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL ~VA~N~ IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925 An appeal is pending in the Commonwealth Court with respect to all four of the above captioned matters. They are all cases in which the petitioner received a notice that as a result of a conviction for driving under the influence, the petitioner's driving Privileges would be suspended for a period of one year. In addition, the notice indicated that, before driving privileges could be restored, there had to be compliance with a requirement that all vehicles owned by the petitioner be equipped with an ignition interlock system. In all of the cases, we entered an order sustaining the petitioner's appeal with respect to that portion of his or her driver's license suspension which reads as follows: Before your driving privilege can be restored you are required by law to have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving Privilege will remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before your eligibility date. Our orders were entered in accordance with Albert Schneider v. Com. of Pa. De t. of Trans. Bureau of Driver Licensin , 790 A.2d 363 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002). In that case, the Commonwealth Court was presented with the same situation that pertains in the matters sub judice. Namely, though the sentencing court failed to impose an ignition interlock requirement, PennDOT has sought to impose the requirement absent a court order. In Schneider, the court held expressly that PennDOT has no unilateral authority to impose ignition interlock device requirements if the trial court fails to do so. entered our orders in the above cases. It was because of this express holding that we March 28, 2003 John Mancke, Esquire For Petitioner Braund Austin Grogan, Esquire For Petition Vathis Robert Mulderig, Esquire For Petitioners Richwine and Hein Terrance M. Edwards, Esquire For PennDOT Ky Hess, J. :rlm RANDALL CARL VATHIS, Petitioner Vo COMMONWEALTH OF PA., DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent RANDALL CARL VATHIS, Petitioner Vo COMMONWEALTH OF PA., DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : 02-3029 CIVIL TERM : : DRIVERS LICENSE APPEAL IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : : CIVIL ACTION - LAW : : NO. 02-5289 CIVIL TERM : : DRIVERS LICENSE APPEAL : IN RE: TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS Proceedings held before the HONORABLE KEVIN A. HESS, J., Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on Monday, January 13, 2003, in Courtroom Number 4. APPEARANCES: GEORGE KABUSK, Esquire For the Commonwealth AUSTIN GROGAN, Esquire For the Petitioner INDEX TO EXHIBITS FOR PENNDOT Ex. No. 1 - certified driving record FOR THE PETITIONER/DEFENDANT Ex. No. 1 - court order 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: I believe there are two matters involving Mr. Vathis. The less complicated of the two is the more recently filed case at 02-5289, so shall we start with that? MR. KABUSK: MR. GROGAN: MR. KABUSK: Yes, Your Honor. Yes, Judge. What's been marked as Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1 is a packet of documents under seal and certification. Grogan. I have provided a copy to Mr. Sub-exhibit No. 1 is the official notice of suspension dated and mailed 10/10/02, effective 9/24/03. That notice to Mr. Vathis, operator's No. 15389992 informed him that as a result of his 6/18/2002 conviction of violating Section 3731 of the Vehicle Code relating to Driving Under the Influence on 3/9/02 his driving privilege was suspended for a period of one year. Additionally that notice of suspension informed him of the Ignition Interlock requirement. Sub-exhibit No. 2 is report of Clerk of Court of Cumberland County, convicted 6/18/02, seal attached to the original. And you would note the Clerk of Courts indicated a conviction on 6/18/02 of a violation of DUI on 3/9/02. I would turn your attention to Box G, the box no is checked in regard to Act 63 Ignition Interlock 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 requirements. The other documents support the Department's case. Additionally the driving record is attached. I move for the admission of what's been marked as Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1. THE COURT: MR. GROGAN: THE COURT: MR. KABUSK: THE COURT: MR. GROGAN: I assume there is no objection? No objection, Your Honor. Anything else on that? No, Your Honor. Okay. Mr. Grogan. Thank you, Your Honor. On behalf of Randy Vathis I have a copy of Judge Bayley's court order dated 24 September 2002 when Judge Bayley sentenced Mr. Vathis to one DUI charge docketed at 02-0661, to forty-eight hours to twelve months, and a fine of $300.00. And then at 0660 he sentenced him to an additional two days to eleven months and a fine of $300.00. Judge Bayley did not order any type of Guardian Interlock system on his car. I will mark this as Defendant's Exhibit No. 1. Your Honor, I am sorry, it is actually Petitioner's Exhibit No. 1. THE COURT: We will make that part of the record. Anything else for the record of this case? MR. GROGAN: No, Your Honor. Not from the petitioner. MR. KABUSK: Your Honor, if I may, I would 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just like a clarification. If the one-year suspension is at issue, he was restored on the one year DUI suspension as well as the Ignition Interlock, so I would ask the petitioner if he is contesting the one-year suspension. MR. GROGAN: Right. I think in hindsight I probably should have been a little bit more articulate in my motion. We were contesting the Guardian Interlock aspect of this notice, not the one year suspension of the -- THE COURT: So you are asking particularly -- and I think that's true in these cases generally, right, that you are asking that the language beginning with Ignition Interlock underscored in that paragraph be stricken? MR. GROGAN: Yes, Your Honor. I apologize for the inartful petition. THE COURT: Okay. Now, in the other matter I entered an order on the 10th of October, which I found that the -- and I have reference to 3029 of 02, that the defendant did not in my view make a knowing refusal of the blood test but nonetheless felt that under the current state of the law that he could not meet his burden of proof without medical testimony and I denied his appeal. There then followed a petition for reconsideration, which was on the 20th, and I signed an 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 order granting reconsideration and vacating the order of October 10th, 2002, on the 28th of October. And I distinctly recall then after that the Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, filed a motion, because I read it, asking that that order in turn be vacated and that my prior order be reinstated and expressing opposition to my earlier vacation of the order. But, Mr. Kabusk, I do not find your motion in this file. MR. KABUSK: here, Your Honor. basis for it. the record. MR. KABUSK: the record, Your Honor. THE COURT: I see November 15th. before you leave? MR. KABUSK: THE COURT: I should have an extra copy THE COURT: I read it and I understand the But that's not right, it should be part of I would ask that it be part of Okay. And this is time stamped Will you need another copy of this I have one, Your Honor. Okay. And it is a motion in turn to vacate my order of October 28th, 2002, which I did not and have not yet signed, and which I understand you would like to argue before we do anything else. MR. KABUSK: Your Honor, I reiterate my motion to vacate. Essentially there is three reasons. One 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is the Department was never served with a copy of the petitioner's motion. Two, the matter was heard. There was ample opportunity for the petitioner to present medical evidence. Even at the conclusion of the hearing the Department set forth a standard. And at that time the petitioner did not ask leave to keep the record open. Therefore, it is essentially asking for a second bite at the apple. And the third reason is the standards would be that expert testimony would only overcome the defense if alcohol played no role. Here there was testimony and even a stipulation of the BAC level of .19. Based upon the case law, and I cited I think seven cases in there, that essentially having a second hearing would be a waste of the Court's resources. Once again, I reaffirm my motion to have the Court vacate the order on October 28th. THE COURT: The cases that you cite, you say seven some cases, they don't actually deal with the vacation of an order and the grant of a second hearing. They address themselves to the merits as to why this would be a fruitless gesture? MR. KABUSK: THE COURT: be heard on that, Mr. Grogan. Yes, Your Honor. I don't know whether you want to I intend not to vacate my 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 order of October 28, 2002. I agree with the Commonwealth that it is extraordinary to grant such a motion without permitting the other side to be heard from. But I will note for the record that I felt confident that I could anticipate the Commonwealth's arguments that the result would have been the vacation of the order in any event. And I therefore for that reason felt it was not the highest and best use of our time to argue whether or not the order should be vacated. I understand that the defendant does have the opportunity and had the opportunity to adduce medical testimony at the time of the hearing. And all appellants are charged with the knowledge of the law. I would, however, guess that the notion that one must have medical testimony even though one is able to adduce credible testimony of an altered mental state is probably not the most well-known point of law and probably came to this appellant as somewhat of a surprise. I simply won't address the matter of Mr. Grogan's opportunity to have requested the opportunity to leave the record open. The point is he did file a motion to vacate. It was filed within thirty days. And while we certainly don't intend to make a habit of this, I am satisfied that in the interests of justice that it was a proper use of my discretion. And we will not grant the 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Commonwealth's motion, and my order of October 28, 2002, remains in effect. Now, I understand from our conference in chambers, however, Mr. Grogan, that you do not have medical testimony? MR. GROGAN: That's correct, Your Honor. Just for the record, I have attempted to contact the doctor, the emergency room doctor, and have been unable to locate him. I contacted Pinnacle Health on three occasions. The first time they indicated he was still aligned with Pinnacle. And the second and third time I never got any information back from the hospital. Furthermore, the only other witness that was present at the time Mr. Vathis was being treated was Mr. Vathis' father, who has since died about a month ago. So the medical testimony that I was hoping to offer I have not been able to secure. Mr. Vathis would like to present himself to the Court and to express his thoughts if the Court would be inclined to hear from Mr. Vathis. THE COURT: Well, I have already found that as a matter of fact that I believed that he was in such a mental state that he did not knowingly refuse a blood test. Is that what you would again say, Mr. Vathis? MR. GROGAN: What do you want to tell the Judge? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. VATHIS: THE COURT: MR. VATHIS: If I may? Yes. Go ahead. 2002 was a very rough year for me. As the record shows, I lost my career, my marriage, my house. All of which was my fault I believe. And the charges that were brought against me, including the two DUI's, I pled to. I didn't fight them. I didn't waste the Court's time on that. Including the pornography charge, I did not waste the Court's time, because I knew I was wrong. In this case I wanted to fight this, because I know that I am right, that I had a head injury when my head hit the windshield and knocked half of my tooth out in the front. I was delirious in the hospital and did not wake up until hours later when I was in restraints. I don't remember this officer being there. I don't remember doctors, nurses. And I don't believe it was because I was intoxicated. I hit my head. And from the time they say they put me in the ambulance -- well, from the time they say they took me out of the car and put me in the ambulance, I don't remember a thing until I woke up in restraints. THE COURT: Did he testify to this effect before? MR. KABUSK: Your Honor, this testimony was in the first hearing. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 that it was. that. THE COURT: I just wanted to satisfy myself MR. GROGAN: Right. THE COURT: I do recall that he testified to And you can simply explain to him I believe him. MR. GROGAN: I know. I think even in your order you find it as a matter of fact. THE COURT: I find it as fact. And I continue to believe that it is so. But I think we know what the outcome is going to be, at least at this level. Ail right. MR. GROGAN: THE COURT: Anything further? No, Your Honor. Thank you. (End of proceedings) 11 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the proceedings are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me on the above cause and that this is a correct transcript of same. Barbara E. Graham official Stenographer The foregoing record of the proceedings on the hearing of the within matter is hereby approved and directed to be filed. Dat~ District 12 CERTIFICATE AND TRANSMITTAL OF RECORDS UNDER PENNSYLVANIA RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 1931 (C) To the Prothonotary of the Apellate Court to which the within matter has been appealed: COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA The undersigned, Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, the said court being a court of record, do hereby certify that annexed hereto is a tree and correct copy of the whole and entire record, including an opinion of the court as required by PA R.A.P. 1925, the original papers and exhibits, if any on file, the transcript of the proceedings, if any, and the docket entries in the following matter: RANDALL CARL VATHIS VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 02-5289CIVIL TERM 438 CD 2003 The documents comprising the record have been numbered from No. 1 to $9, and attached hereto as Exhibit A is a list of the documents correspondingly numbered and identified with reasonable definiteness, including with respect to each document, the number of pages comprising the document. The date on which the record has been transmitted to the Appellate Court is 4/7/03. CurtidR. Long, oih-'6hota Jane H. Sparling, Dpty. An additional copy of this certificate is enclosed. Please sign and d~te coo¥, thereby acknowledoin~ receipt of this record. Date Signature & Title Among the Records and Proceedings enrolled in the court of Common Pleas in and for the county of CUMBERLAND Term, 19_ COPY OF COMP T,F, TF, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is contained the following: DOCKET ENTRY RANDALL CARL VATHIS VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SEE ATTACHED CERTIFIED DOCKET ENTRIES. · aa~q~asla se aanlea!pn.f jo slanoD u! ilaaX se 'u~ntg aq ol lqgno pug aae l]paa~ pug q}~gj llnj qons se sloe osoq~ iI~ ol ~paUllenb pue pauo~ss~mmoD Klnp 'KlunoD pies ~oj pue u~ aO~ad aq~ jo suo!ssas ~alaen0 jo l~noD pu~ l~noD ,ueqd~0 'SeOld uommoD jo lsnoD aql jo a~pnf luap~sa~d s~ ll~lS pue 'joa~aql Su~em jo ~mU aql 1~ 's~ 'omeu s~q paqu~sqns oluna~aql s~q oq~ pue ~ap~m se~ uog~lsoll~ ~u~o2a~oj oql moq~ ~q u~. S~ald uommoD jo lanoD aql Jq Kaelouoqload 5=eg -~ ~*~"3-~ -" 'I s!ql olunaaaq aAeq I ':tO~I~I~tHA~ ANOINIISTll Ul pueuaqtunD jo K:unoD e!U~Al,~SUUad jo qlleaaxuotutuoD ~ o I