The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About97-05405 PYS510 Cumber land County Prothonotary's Oft ice Page 1 Civil Case Inquiry 1997-05405 KLINE JOHN PATRICK (VS) COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Reference No..1 Filed........l 10/02/1997 Case TYPe,....1 APPEAL - LICENSE SUSP Time. '1' ..... I 14113 Judgment '1' . . . I .00 Execut on DI\t.e 0/88/0880 Judge Ass gnedl OLER J WESLEY JR Sat/Dls/Gntd.. 0/ /0 0 JUr~ Trial. . . . Hi~ er Court 1 Hi er Court 2 ..........**..............**....**........****......... ........................ General Index Attorney Info KLINE JOHN PATRICK APPELLANT KLINE ROBERT P 1804 BRANDT AVENUE NEW CUMBERLAND PA 17070 PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF APPELLEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION HARRISBURG PA 17101 ................................................................................ * Date Entries * .~...........................................*.................................. ~.p 18/02/97~ APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVERS LICENSE ,.1 /13/97XORDER OF COURT - DATED 10/13/97 - IN RE PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM u LICENSE SUSPENSION - HEARING DE NOVO IS GRANTED - HEARING 2/13/97 IJ-h 1:30 P~I CR 5 - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J - NOTICE MAILED 10/14/97 10/24/97 -1.AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE \~~10/28/97XAFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE ";2/10/98 ....MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ~\ 2/13/98 jl,ORDER OF ~OURT - DATED 2/12/98 - IN RE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE - /1 HEARING 2 13/98 HAS BEEN CONTINUED - HEARING SHALL BE HELD 5/28/98 1:30 PM C 1 - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J - COPIES MAILED 2/13/98 ,06/02/98 XORDER OF COURT - DATED 5/28/98 - IN RE APPEAL OF PETITIONER/ d~ APPELLANT FROM THE SUSPENSION - APPEAL IS SUSTAINED AND THE SUSPENSION IS REVERSED - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J 0 COPIES MAILED :l~.:JI 6/3/98 ~, 6724/98^NOTICE OF APPEAL TO COMMONWEALTH COURT BY TIMOTHY P WILE ESQ ..n 7/27/98 TRANSCRIPT FILED ~ 08/17/98 IN RE OPINION PURSUANT TO PA RAP 1925"___.... y,~......*.......*......*......*......*.....*......**~........**.................. L.t* Escrow Inforl1)ation * * Fees & Debits Bea Bal Pvmts/Ad1 nd Bal * .......................**.......,........\......,...... ......................** 35.00 35.00 .50 .50 5.08 5'80 5.0 5. 0 2.00 2,00 30.00 30,00 ------------------------ 77.50 77.50 ...................................................... * End of Case Information .................................................. APPEAL LIe SUSP TAX ON APPEAL SETTLEMENT JCP FEE SUBPOENA APPEAL '80 . 0 .00 .00 '80 . 0 .00 ........................ * ............................ f'x~,b, L :,-,,5",;16' '( / . ~ By notice dated September 4, 1997, the Department suspended Licensee's operating privilege for a period of one year as a result of the Virginia conviction, The Department's notice advised in part as follows: Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code requires the Department to treat certain out of state convictions as though they had occurred in Pennsylvania, Therefore, as a result of the Department receiving notification from VIRGINIA of your conviction on 07/09/97 of an offense which occurred on 06/01/97, which is equivalent to a violation of Section 3731 of the Pa, Vehicle Code, DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE, your driving privilege is being SUSPENDED for a period of 1 YEAR(S), as mandated by Section 1532B of the Vehicle Code, (Commonwealth Exhibit L) Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa, C.S, ~1581, sets forth the provisions of the Driver's License Compact (Compact), Article III of the Compact provides in part that the "licensing authority of a party state shall report each COl1\'lction of a person from another party state occurring within its jurisdiction to the licensing authority of the home state of the licensee," Article IV of the Compact provides in pertinent part as follows: ~.' r (a) The licensing authority in the home state, for the purposes of suspension, revocation or limitation of the license to operate a motor vehicle, shall give the same effect to the conduct reported, pursuant to Article III of this compact, as it would if such conduct had occurred in the home state in the case of convictions for . . . * (2) driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic drug or under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders the driver incapable of safely driving a motor vehicle.,.. . . . * (c) If the laws of a party state do not provide for offenses or violations denominated or described in precisely the 2 .' \\ words employed in subdivision (a) of this article, such party state shall construe the denominations and descriptions appearing in subdivision (a) of this article as being applicable to and identifying those offenses or violations of a substantially similar nature and the laws of such party state shall contain such provisions as may be necessary to ensure that full force and effect is given to this article, (Emphasis added,) Licensee filed a statutory appeal with the trial court, which found that Licensee was not convicted on the basis of conduct that would have constituted the offense of DUl in Pennsylvania, Rather, the trial court found that Licensee's conviction was predicated solely upon a blood alcohol content level below that proscribed for an adult driver in Pennsylvania, The trial court concluded that Licensee's Virginia conviction was not for an offense substantially similar to a ,iolation of Section 3731 of the Vehicle Codel and sustained Licensee's appeal, On appeal to this Court", the Department contends that the trial court an:J In holding that Virginia's DUl statute is not substantially similar to Pennsylvania's for purposes of suspending Licensee's operating privilege under Article IV of Com pac I. Virginia's statutory provision proscribing vanous forms of driving \\ hi Ie intoxicated reads as follows: ~ 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while intoxicated, etc.-- it shall be unlawful for any person to I 75 Pa. C.s, ~373 \, lOur scope of review is limited to determining whether the trial court's findings of fact are supported by competent evidence or whether the trial court committed an error of law or abuse of discretion in reaching its decision. Department of Transportation. Bureau of Traffic Safety \' O'Connell, 521 Pa, 242, 555 A.2d 873 (1989). 3 . I drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train (i) while such person has a blood alcohol con celli ration of 0,08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0,08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article. (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, or (iv) while such person is under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs which impairs his abilily to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv), Va, Code Ann, ~ 18,2-266 (emphasis added), Pennsylvania's DUI statute states: . . (a) Offense defined. -- A person shall not drive, operate or be in actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle in any of the following circumstances: f I I I I: ! i ~. f (I) While under the influence of alcohol to a degree which renders the pr.rson incapable of safe driving, (2) While under the influence of any controlled substance '" to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving, (3) While under the combined influence of alcohol and any controlled substance to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving. i; I r i I (4) While the amount of alcohol by weight in the blood of' (i) an adult is 0.10% or greater; or (ii) a minor is 0,02% or greater. 4 ',I 75 Pa, C.S, *3731(a) (emphasis added), In determining whether a reported offense in a party state may properly serve as a basis for suspending a Pennsylvania licensee's operating privilege. the party state's offense need only be "substantially similar" to Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code in order to mandate a suspension under the Compact Fisher v, Depal1ment of Transportation. Bureau of Driver Licensinil, 709 A,2d 1008 (Pa, Cmwlth, 1998), In Fisher, a Pennsylvania licensee was convicted of violating New Hampshire's DUI statute, N,H, Rev,Stat *265.82. Under that statute, it is unlawful for a person to drive "(a) While such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any controlled drug"" or (b) While such person has an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more..,," The Fisher court found that the language of this statute was substantially similar to the language of Section 3 731 (a) of the Vehicle Code. thereby creating a substantially similar offense, The Department argues that the holding in Fisher establishes that \'Irgmia's DUI statute is substantially similar to Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code. However. the Fisher court made clear that, because the licensee had refused a chemical blood test, the case did not involve a p.er .5l: violation of the statute; thus. the only issue before the Fisher court was whether the language of the two statutes was substantially similar, The Fisher coul1 did not compare the provisions of the statutes setting forth blood alcohol concentration levels, Instead, the court round that the language in Section 3731 (a), "[w]hile under the influence of alcohol to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving" was substantially similar to the language in New Hampshire's DUI statute, "[w]hile such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor."À 5 I Here, however, as noted by the trial court, Licensee was convicted only of driving with a blood alcohol concentration level of 0,08% or more, and his conviction expressly excluded the other offenses set forth in Virginia's statute, i.e" driving under the influence of alcohol or under the influence of alcohol to II degree which impaired his ability to drive safely. We cannot compare the statutes in their entirety, when Licensee was convicted only ofa ~ ~ violation of Virginia's nUl statute based on his blood alcohol level. Looking only at the offense for which Licensee was convicted, we agree with the trial court that Licensee's conduct would have no consequences under Pennsylvania law," A person violates Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code if such person has a blood alcohol content level of 0,1 0% or higher, w: if such person is under the Influence of alcohol to a degree that renders the person incapable of safe driving, While a driver in Pennsylvania need not have a blood alcohol level of 0,10% in order to be convicted of DUl, where there is no evidence to this effect, the Department must prove that the licensee was influenced by alcohol to a degree that he could not drive safely, Olmstead v. Department of Transportation. Bureau of Dmcr lIce~, 677 A,2d 1285 (Pa, Cmwlth, 1996), aIDI, 550 Pa, 578,707 A.2d 1144 ( 1998), A person driving with a blood alcohol level of 0,08% will suffer no .1 Similarly, in Eck v. Department of Transportation. Bureau of Driver Licensinll, 713 "\.1d 7..\..\ (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998), the court confined its analysis to the language of the specific prOVISion of the party state's DUl statute under which the licensee was convicted, The licensee In Ed was convicted under a subsection of Maryland's DUl statute prohibiting a person from driving under the influence of alcohol. The ~ court observed that the use of am: amount of alcohol would support a conviction under this subsection, while a conviction under Pennsylvania's law requires evidence that the licensee was under the influence of alcohol to a degree that rcnders him incapable of driving safely, The court concluded that the two offenses wcre not substantially similar. The Ed court also noted that the offense of driving while Intoxicated, set forth in a different subsection of Maryland's OUI statute, is more akin to Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code, 6 I IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA )OHN PATRICK KLINE v, No. 1683 C.D. 1998 COMMONWEALTH OF : PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT: OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU: OF DRlVER LICENSING, Appellant QBO.E& NOW, February 25. l'l'l'l ,the order of the Court of Common Pleas of ClJmbr.:rland County is affirmed. CERTifiED FROM THE RECOR[ AND ORDER EXIT FEB 2 ;j 1999 (?/t $....e...- ~ -, D8PUty Prothonotary. ChleiCrerk SAMUEL L. RODGERS, S (' "I [~ [11.': (',~. /J , (.-~ .. : ~ ) ..-1" ..- , ': l ' ) I ~~; '-'.:r: (-I' ~ , ' : . ; ( \{) <'.'1 , , ~ ; , L-l. , c.; l:.l , j L~ " '. " r"', l , , (1' () . ~ By notice dated September 4, 1997, the Department suspended Licensee's operating privilege for a period of one year as a result of the Virginia conviction, The Department's notice advised in part as follows: Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code requires the Department to treat certain out of state convictions as though they had occurred in Pennsylvania, Therefore, as a result of the Department receiving notification from VIRGINIA of your conviction on 07/09/97 of an offense which occurred on 06/0 I /97, which is equivalent to a violation of Section 3731 of the Pa, Vehicle Code, DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE, your driving privilege is being SUSPENDED for a period of 1 YEAR(S), as mandated by Section 15328 of the Vehicle Code. (Commonwealth Exhibit L) Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa, c.s, * 1581, sets forth the provisions of the Driver's License Compact (Compact), Article III of the Compact provides in part that the "licensing authority of a party state shall report each conviction of a person from another party state occurring within its jurisdiction to the licensing authority of the home state of the licensee," Article IV of the Compact provides in pertinent part as follows: (a) The licensing authority in the home state, for the purposes of suspension, revocation or limitation of the license to operate a motor vehicle, shall give the same effect to the conduct reported, pursuant to Article III of this compact, as it would if such conduct had occurred in the home state in the case of convictions for . . . . (2) driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic drug or under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders the driver incapable of safely driving a motor vehicle.... . . . . (c) If the laws of a party state do not provide for offenses or violations denominated or described in precisely the 2 . words employed in subdivision (a) of this article, such party state shall construe the denominations and descriptions appearing in subdivision (a) of this article as being applicable to and identifying those offenses or violations of a subs/all/ially similar IIa/ure and the laws of such party state shall contain such provisions as may be necessary to ensure that full force and effect is given to this article, (Emphasis added,) Licensee tiled a statutory appeal with the trial court, which found that Licensee was not convicted on the basis of conduct that would have constituted the offense of DUI in Pennsylvania, Rather, the trial court found that Licensee's con\'lction was predicated solely upon a blood alcohol content level below that proscribed for an adult driver in Pennsylvania, The trial court concluded that Licensee's Virginia conviction was not for an offense substantially similar to a \'Iolation of Section 3731 of the Vehicle Codel and sustained Licensee's appeal. On appeal to this Coure, the Department contends that the trial court erml In holding that Virginia's DUI statute is not substantially similar to Pennsylvania's for purposes of suspending Licensee's operating privilege under Article IV of Compact. Virgillia's statutory provision proscribing vanous fonns of driving \\ hile imoxicated reads as follows: ~ 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while Intoxicated, etc.- It shall be unlawful for any person to I 75 Pa. e.S. ~3731. ~ Our scope of review is limited to detcnnining whether the trial court's findings of fact arc suppcrted by competent evidence or whether the trial court commilled so error of law or abuse of discretion in reaching ils decision, Department of Transportation. Bureau of Traffic Safel}' \' O'Connell, 521 Pa. 242, 555 A2d 873 (1989). 3 II. drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train (i) while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article, (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, or (iv) while such person is under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely. A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (iii) or (iv). Va. Code Ann. ~ 18.2-266 (emphasis added). Pennsylvania's DUI statute states: (a) Offense defined. -- A person shall not drive, operate or be in acnlal physical control of the movement of a vehicle in any of the following circumstances: (I) While under the influence of alcohol to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving. (2) While under the influence of any controlled substance ... to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving. (3) While under the combined influence of alcohol and any controlled substance to a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving. (4) While the amount of alcohol by weight in the blood of' (i) an adult is O. J 0% or greater; or (ii) a minor is 0.02% or greater. 4 . 75 Pa. C.S. ~3731(a)(emphasis added). In determining whether a reported offense in a party state may properly serve as a basis for suspending a Pennsylvania licensee's operating privilege, thc party state's offense nced only be "substantially similar" to Section 373 I (a) of the Vehicle Code in order to mandate a suspension under the Compact. Fisher \'. Department of Transportation. Bureau of Driver Licensini:, 709 A.2d 1008 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998). In Fisher, a Pennsylvania licensee was convicted of \'iolating New Hampshire's DUI statute, N.H. Rev.Stat. ~265.82. Under that statute, it is unlawful for a person to drive Uta) While such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any controlled drug..., or (b) While such person has an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more...... The Fisher court found that the language of this statute was substantially similar to the language of Section 3731 (a) of the Vehicle Code, thereby creating a substantially similar offense. The Department argues that the holding in fisher establishes that \'irginia's DUI statute is substantially similar to Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code. However. the Fisher court made clear that, because the licensee had refused a chcmical blood test, the case did not involve a p.er g violation of the statute; thus. the only issue before the Fisher court was whether the language of the two statutes was substantially similar. The Fisher court did not compare the provisions of the statutes setting forth blood alcohol concentration levels. Instead, the court found that the language in Section 3731(a), "[w]hile under the influence of alcohol 10 a degree which renders the person incapable of safe driving" was substantially similar to the language in New Hampshire's DUI statute, "(w)hile such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor." 5 . Here, however, as noted by the trial court, Licensee was convicted only of driving with a blood alcohol concentration level of 0.08% or more, and his conviction expressly excluded the other offenses set forth in Virginia's statute, Le., drivmg under the influence of alcohol or under the influence of alcohol to a degree which impaired his ability to drive safely. We cannot compare the statutes in their entirety, when Licensee was convicted only ofa I.lC! g violation of Virginia's DUI statute based on his blood alcohol level. Looking only at the offense for which l.icensee was convicted, we agree with the trial court that Licensee's conduct would have no consequences under Pennsylvania law.) A person violates Section 3731(a) of the Vehicle Code ifsuch person has a blood alcohol content level of 0.1 0% or higher, III if such person is under the Influence of alcohol to a degree that renders the person incapable of safe driving. While a driver in Pennsylvania need not have a blood alcohol level of 0.10% in order to be convicted of DUI, where there is no evidence to this effect, the Department must prove that the licensee was influenced by alcohol to a degree that he could not drive safely. Q101stead v. Department of Transportation. Bureau of Dmer L.lcensinl:, 677 A.2d 1285 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996),lIi.C.d, ;50 Pa. 578, 707 A.2d 1144 ( 1998). A person driving with a blood alcohol level of 0.08% will suffer no .' Similarl)'. in Eck v Department of Tran~portation. Bureau of Driver Licensina, 713 A2d 744 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1998). the court confined its analysis to the language of the specific [HO\ISIOn of the party state's DUI statute under which the licensee was convicled. The licensee In f.d was convicted under a subsection of Maryland's OUI statute prohibiting a person from dri\'ing under the influence of alcohol. The ~ court observed that the use of ~ amount of alcohol would support a conviction under this subsection, while a conviction under Pennsylvania's law requires evidence thai the licensee was under the influence of alcohol to a degree that renders him incapable of driving safely. The court concluded that the two offenses \\cre not substantially similar. The ~ court also noted Ihat the offense of driving while intoxicated. set forth in a differenl subsection of Maryland's OUI statute, is more akin to Section 3731(a)ofthe Vehicle Code. 6 ""'" i"""I has a blood alcohol conccntrutionofO.08 pcrccntor more by wcight by vollllne or 0.08 grams or 1II0rc per 210 Iitcrs of brcllth liS indiclltcd by II chcmicaltcstlldministcrcd lIS providcd in this IIrticle." Thc Honornblc D.l.. Kimblc ofthc Town of Hel'lldon. Virginill. Trullic Court. spccificlllly struck outllny linding thlltthc Petitioncr WtlS guilty in tiny WilY of driving 01' opcrating II1110tor vehicle while undcr thc influcncc of ulcohol: or whilc lIndcr thc influcncc of any narcotic drug or uny othcr self-administcrcd intoxlcunt or II cOlllbincd influcncc of n!cohol IInd uny drug to a dcgrcc which impllircd the IIccuscd's ubilily 10 drive or opcrule II motor vehicle safcly. Petitioner was sentenced to pay a tinc 01'$1.500,00. with $1,200.00 suspendcd; to serve sixty (60) days in jail, with all sixty (60) days suspended conditioned upon being of good behavior in keeping the peace; one (I) year inllctive probation; completion of the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program or its cquivalent: and suspension of his driving privilcges in the Commonwealth of Virginia for a period of twelve (12) 1II0nths. efTective on that date. Judge Kimble IIlso indicated that Petitioner was eligible lor a restricted operator's license in the Commonwealth of Virginia. A copy of Section 18.2-266 of the Virginia Code and a copy of the conviction record 10[' John Patrick Kline li'om the Town of Hemdon. Virginia. Traffic Court are auached as Exhibits Band C, respectively. 5. The suspension is improper and unlawful lor the lollowing reasons: (A) There is no exact equivalent of Section 18.2-266(i) of the Virginia Code in the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code: (B) Petitioner's conviction is specifically not a conviction of "driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic drug or under the influence of any other drug to a degree which renders the driver incapable of safely driving a motor vehicle" or its equivalent, pursuant to Article IV(a)(2) of the Driver's License Compact. 75 Pa.C.S.A. ~1581: (C) Notification to thc public concerning reciprocity. as well as the Driver's License Compact and Administrative Procedures Manual. and the statute clearly indicate that driving a motor vehicle while under the influence is limited to those chal'ges which specifically are" driving a motor vehicle while under the inlluence of alcoholic beverages or a narcotic to a degree which renders the driver ,3 ~ ~ incapable of safely driving 0 motor vehicle" of which conduct the defendant was not fbund guilty; (D) '111e Pennsylvania Bullctin, us well us thc Driver's License Compact and Administrative Procedures Munuul, c1eurly indicates that the licensing authority in the horne stute shull give "such el1'ect to the conduct as is provided by the laws of the home stute"und under the luws of the home state, your Petitioner would be ARD eligible, which would not involve uone yeur loss of license or u conviction: (E) The Drivcr's License Compuct is not being cnforced in Pennsylvaniu except for a few violutioos and suid enforcement therefilre denies equul protection and due process und has resulted in illegal delegation of authority and violation of low, and discriminatory treatment in violution of the Stlltes and Fedeml Constitution and of the Driver's License Compact: (F) Action of the Department of Transportation violutes the full faith and credit of the Federal Constitution in that the Departmcnt of Transportation has mandated 0 one year suspension, without the possibility of any special consideration, when Virginia has mandated a one year suspension. with the Petitioner eligible for 0 restricted operator's license; (G) The one year suspension is in violation of the Driver's License Compact and Administrative Procedures Manual in that your Petitioner will not be restored at the expiration of his suspension imposed by Virginia; (H) Pennsylvania lacks jurisdiction over acts occurring in Virginia; (I) If the action of the Department ofTranspor.ation violates the principles of double jeopardy and collateral estoppel and are in violation of the Pennsylvania Constitution, the Virginia Constitution and the Federal Constitution, and all related and applicable State Rules of Criminal Procedure: (1) Your Petitioner is being penalized a second time for actions for which he had previously been penalized; (K) Notice to the Public contained III the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Vol. 24, No. 45, November 5, 1994, Page 5609, indicated that only charges of "drunk driving" are reciprocal and the charges against the Petitioner did not constitute drunk driving and the statutory provisions of the Driver's License Compact, Article 111. Section (a)(2), Act 1996-149. IIIdicates that the provisions apply only to "driving under the influence to a degree which renders someone incapable of safe driving" and the Petitioner has not been convicted of that charge: .f """ t""'\ COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bureau of Driver Licensing Harrisbury, PA 17123 SEPTEMBER 04,1997 JOHN PATRICK KLINL 11104 BRANDT AVL NLW CUMBLRLAND PA 17070 9724061017411185 001 08/28/1997 21739540 0'1/28/1%8 Dear Motorist I Section 1561 of the Vehicle Code requires the Dopartment to treat certain out of state convictions as though they hod occurred in Pennsylvania, Therefore, as a result uf the De- partment receiving notification from VIRGINIA of your con- viction on 07/09/1997 of an offense which occurred on 06/01/1997, which is equivalent to a violation of Section 3731 of the Pa, Vehicle Code, DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE, your driving privilege is being SUSPENOED for a period of 1 YEAR(S), as mandated by Section 15328 of the Vehicle Code, The effective date of suspension is 10/09/1997, 12:01 a.m. In order to cornply with this sanction yoU are required to return any current driver's license, learner's permit and/or temporar'y drivor's license (camera card) in your possession no later than the effective date listed, If you cannot com- ply with the requirements stated abuve, yOU are required to submit a DL16LC Form or a sworn affidavit stating that yOU are aware of the sanction against your driving priVilege, Failure to comply with this notice shall result in this Bu- reau referring this matter to the Pennsylvania State Police for prosecution under SECTION 1571(a)(4) of the Vehicle Code. Although the law mandates that yuur driving priVilege is un- der suspension even if yoU do not surrender your license, Credit will not begin until all current driver' s license product (s), the DL16LC Form, or a letter acknOWledging your sanction is received in this Bureau. WHEN THE DEPARTMENT RECEIVES YOUR LICENSE OR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT, WE WILL SEND YOU A RECEIPT, IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE THIS RECEIPT WITHIN 15 DAYS CONTACT THE DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY, OTHERWISE, YOU WILL NOT BE GIVEN CREDIT TOWARD SERVING THIS SANCTION, E~H'81T ~ IJ II t ~ .. I ~ 1''''' ., \; In "... ~ ~ l' ... b S , 0 " :1 .a R. :~ :~o' ts:~ .1:' ~l~ ~'. 'l~)f-: ~ ,:3 : i ~: : a I;x ~: ~. .' M' Z, .,," ,: : :!l J ~ . ~ ~ .~ ; ." l/l :~O :] : -a ~ : E .~ : 8 .. : II ~ 'f:. :is ;,.\ \ '11": t) .~: .I'~,~'~J ;i.60.tl .~:,:] ~ .~ ~. ~ j o ~ ~ ~ J ,~ .~ 1 ,:~ j 1 :,,'~ -:0 u. ti: ~.~ ~, ;~ i-< '" . z'. ~ ::S'LL. ~' 0' ..;; ~ :~ ::; I- 1 fl": . i~... ~ ~ .~.j ~.~, .~. ..', w '@ ~ ~ ,. set iIi .2 ~ .S ".' ~;j: '2 .~ >. ~ g $11'~:~ '0 ~] .~ ~ :g !.! ~ .~... t;l;.: ~ ofj :S;;pl- ,,:1 'Ox >~ g -s llW IQO:: ~ ~ ~~l:!.~ U ~ .51 iO .s .s d~ "'~ '0 U au o,~ E ~ ~;:i.::J "~ oWW " ~ u:> uo tic! ~ 9 ~ . a:::,.... W -S t: 0 0'" wN U C :::l Co lE 1; 8 i:g~ . o ~'l .:!I.... . Cl ::i oSm <(0 w Ul E u...... W '" t:l g ,28 ~:Si. c.: " 1:...... 1'1'\ '" o _. ",:g I W ~ ~ F 1! ~ ~2;;::~ '-' ", ,"-" '" <( " ,t:,~ t.O a:: eX . ~J #( ... lO 0..... ;,.. ~ .,,; :.1 N zC) , '/. :1 r. .l; ...!., LJJ UJ ..,. t: .... <oj . '" :> Om 0:.... ~I (; cxi~:ZO f.-. r: C~ M ~ S-: ( ~ __ z 3 ~ la ... o ~ ~ t; 1. i-<Z .r N U ~< ~ ~ 8 ~ f: w ! ~ . ~~ ~ g OU lS.: ~ J ~~~ N !i!;S 8 ~ ~ ~ ~. r2 ~ U 0: ~ ~ S!lQ O! d oJ IQ :~ .il: :0 ,U :oS :~ . .~ :8 ] 'B . u .<( u oS :1 oS .U > '.!:! }] 9 ~ :z ~ '... 0 u" A <U.1l Z :t5 E ffi ~ E x ~" <0 0.'1 ..:t -g ~ ~ ~ E :11. ...:; <? v ;:: ~ ", :lE .2 ~! '" "0 ~ .~ 11 o .., o ~ ~~ 'Il <.0 ~ c: ..::t ~~ r:. . . /., ~ S" " ., III Vl '" .r eJ ., " EYH J~r; ,) " t,-) ,t:: &i ...... ..... ? <.0 <:0 c. " -- .l. ! q ..J' ,~ ~ I 'I . ,l " .'1> I' ,I ~ 'I:. 'I.' ' --:....~... I 'j.' ~ ,I '1 ~:TI .~7 :i( ~'; ,..(',- ]~I~; ~ ',' r: a 1.1 '. 1:';' ~~ '~:.I' ~ ;' I . 01 ,," ~ ,~. ~ -(, ~ ~ .l' 0( ,!j ~ '- ,: .s ..s ~ Oil .5 t: .t/) ~ .g :5 .s ;;- ~ 11 ~ u'" O~n' ~:' ~.. -51-0 III ..., l/I ~ 0 I ';; z.fJ ~,.g' II "! 0 ~.:!I ~.D", :0::: ....... <11 oS :s E"" ,,- V\ c: u 0 '""- B 0 :5'..:: v ~ ~~ n ~ ~ lJJ ~ & =' I o DO. ~ OJ "0 .!! .d 1j- ..: t:: ~ ~ o 0 ell U == ." c" ~ ~ ;. ~ .E' ..2 ",1: ~ ~ u It - 0. i " H ':. "";"J .:.; ,( ',I r.:: ""::l r''' ~ .i: .:: ...~ :';". '.: s; .- " 9 ,., :" I' --: .; ~ " " ... '7 ~ :1 ~ ~ ~ ~ I .. .~ ~ >, e ~ ~, 'il t) :1 ~ ~ E ~ l/l " :s fj ~ ~ ., ::i "2 o " ., ~ c I;! i :; I i: 1"/ ., ,. ' , '~ I ~I ~~ Q~ < ." L ] @ <( u oS ~ .2 ~I E 9 ! .:;: .S l 9 ~ g g ~ ~ ~ " 0 1A z ~~6 ~ ,,- 8;g~ >.o=: c u~. .- - 0 ~ i:< .~ 1A z 6 tQ < o "' ~ r~ t; " It!:: '" 0. f- 'lJ l";IV''J 'I: I') '/, ~. ~ 0 L ~ V ~"-;; I- E:.:! 9 _'1 .~ '/. ...)".. !" r~' 1.Ll ,:,: 0 . L":'l..i .::: ~'~ :: ~1J .~I ~ - ,. '-' ..... / ~ ~ t ~. " ~ ~ ~-a ~,,) , , ", ~ , ' i' .,' r'" " ~ ~. - rv '->, (j \0 .... rJ.. IF~ -.I Q -.l 0 .':1 ":) eeJ ...... ~ jlt. ,", ,~ -..J . , ..i ';'r ~ v' I 'J g P":.l '::1 :.J~B "; :'~~ j.. ~ ,"l.,. ..... ..'i~, '-'Ie.. '''''':", N ..m -- ., ;;1 :;J, c.:> :i1 , ~ -< ,. 1""1 ('I .', , , ., " . , " " , ., .! , 11 q,') ,':) , , ,.i' "I "11 .') . ,', ./ , , " I I I " .j l'j ,.Ii I') '1,(11 , , 'N. , "f ;,iJ "I ( i(1 i": ''::'1 . '\~ ('") ". ",ii'i'l , ';.';' <I,..., :,"! ,. I l'r;) I ;1,1 , "',;" , , , ' I' " , , .i , " 'I., ,,,,"\ ,," 1;1 " " "'"" , , I" " ,I -J:J "'1 ~,l " , ..." , I, I' L I. ',I .j , :r,".i ,t~') " I>. ';1) ,;(~ : ~: I I'-f. , f~) .,'.' I ,\'n I .. .! ;':1 J_ ~~? , , , , I , , ,', -.. ,,-.. JOHN PATRICK KLINE. IN HIE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERl.AND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA Petitioner vs. NO.97-5405 CIVIL TERM COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL Respondent )"OTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND NOW, comes John Patrick Kline. Petitioner herein, by and through his counsel. Robert Peter Kline, Esquire, and respectfully petitions this Honorable Court for a continuance of the hearing scheduled for Friday, February 13, 1998, at I :30 PM, as follows: I. Petitioner had previously filed a license suspension appeal with this Court and the Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr., had scheduled a hearing for the above date and time. 2. One of the many issues raised in the Petition for Appeal from License Suspension is that under the laws of the home state (Pennsylvania), your Petitioner would be ARD eligible which would not involve a one year loss of license or a conviction. In order to elicit testimony regarding ARD eligibility criteria in Cunlberland County, Pennsylvania, Petitioner had supoenaed John A. Abom. Jr.. Assistant District Attorney for Cumberland County. among whose responsibilities in his position as Assistant District Attomey include deternlining eligibility for the ARD Program in DUI cases. 3. Late on Friday afternoon, February 6, 1998. Mr. Aborn contacted Petitioner's counsel and advised Petitioner's counsel that the only opportunity he had to interview a medical expert witness in another case scheduled for the March Tenn of Court prior to the March Term of Court was the aftemoon of February 13. 1998. Therefore. he requested to be excused from his subpoena. Mr. Abom followed that telephone request with a letter. a copy of which is attached as Petitioner's Exhibit "A". 4. Petitioner will be prejudiced in the presentation of his case in the event that Mr. Abom is unable to provide the testimony for which he was subpoenaed. 5. The inability of Mr. Abom to interview this particular expert witness would have an adverse impact on the District Attorney's prosecution in another cruninal matter. If ,. ,-.. I ' 6. Continuance of thl$ matter would not prejudice the COlllmonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department ofTrw1Sportnllon, in any Illanner whatsoever. 7. Petitioner's cowlsel has sought the concurrence of George A. Knbusk, Esquire, COWlsel lor the Department of Transportation in this case, BIld Mr. Kabusk, over the telephone. Indicated that while he may object to Mr. Abom's testimony at the time ofthe hearing, he does not object to the grwlting of the continuance. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests this Honorable Court to continue the hearing scheduled for February 13, 1998, to BIlother date nnd time. __~B Iqqp, Date Respectfully submitted, rl~rp~ ROBERT PETER KLINE, ESQUIRE 331 Bridge Street, Suite 350 Post Office Box 461 New Cumberland, PA 17070-0461 (717) 770-2540 Attorney for Petitioner / 9 -, - , t: . I'I! I COMMONWEALTH OF PF.NNSYL VANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE Of CHIEF COUNSEL VEHICLE & TRAFFIC LAW DIVISION BY: TIMOTHY P. WILE AS.\'/STANT ('OllNSl:'/. IN-CHARGE APPHUATIi S/:'C7'/ON ATTORNEY IDENTIFICATION NO. 30397 RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER - THIRD FLOOR 1101 SOUTH FRONT STREET HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17104.2516 (717) 787-2830 } IN TIlE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS . OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PA } } . } } NO. 97-5405 CIVIL TERM ~ Notice is hereby given that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department ofTronsportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, hereby appeals to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania from the order that was filed in this matter on May 28, 1998. 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. JOHN PATRICK KLINE, Appellee vs. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Appellant .-JvJe TIMOTHY . WILE Assistant ounsel In-Charge Appel/at Sect/on Vehicle & Traffic Law Dlvlston Riverfront Office Center. Third Floor 1101 South Front Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17104-2516 (717) 787-2830 ?-3 " i'""'I 1"'--'" I, , j I, I I I I I I I I , I n '!1l n c; 'II I I ~- ~ ,:I , . ,-.; n7J ,-. II '{/J\" n "It] ".~ I' ,;, " ,(" 1,:'\ ,,-.1 I I, '(j "-'-., :J:B ' " " ~;:.: ;ii~I:) 6 )~; ;;-1,':; .. 6m :<! :;) ~. I "'- ~ I ,~ I:- l.\ ill O':l C' .. ~ '..,j '" ,I ,-, ~ . ~ .. !: ~ PYS510 1997-05405 ~mber1and county Prothonota~y's Office Page Civil Case In uir ~ KLINE JOHI ATRICK (VS) COMMO~WEArTH. PENNSYLVANIA 1 Reference No,,: Filed""",,: 10/02/19A~ Ca~e TYpe,.",: APPEAL - LICENSE SUSP Time"1" ",.: I 141 JUdgment '1' , , , 1 ,00 Execut on Date 8 88/00 Judge Ass gnedl OLER J WESLEY JR sat/Dis/Gntd. , I 1000 Jur~ Trial", , Hi~ er Court 1 Hi er Court 2 ....................................................... ........................ General Index Attorney Info KLINE JOHN PATRICK APPELLANT KLINE ROBERT P 1004 BRANDT AVENUE NEW CUMBERLAND PA 17070 PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF APPELLEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION HARRISBURG PA 17101 ................................................................................ * Date Entries * .............................................*.................................. 18/02/97 APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVERS LICENSE 113/97 ORDER OF COURT - DATED 10113/97 - IN RE PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM LICENSE SUSPENSION - HEARING DE NOVO IS GRANTED - HEARING 2113197 1:30 PM CR 5 - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J - NOTICE MAILED 10/14/97 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE ORDER OF COURT - DATED 2/12/98 - IN RE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE - HEARING 2/13/98 HAS BEEN CONTINUED - HEARING SHALL BE HELO 5/28/98 1130 PM CR 1 - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J - COPIES MAILED 2/13/98 06/02/98 ORDER OF COURT - DATED 5/28/98 - IN RE APPEAL OF PETITIONERI APPELLANT FROM THE SUSPENSION - APPEAL IS SUSTAINED AND THE ~~~?~~SION IS REVERSED - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J 0 COPIES MAILED ....**........................***............................................... * Escrow Information * * Fees , Debits Bea Bal Pvmts/Ad 1 End Bal * .............*......*.......*...f*....*..~......,............***................ 18/24/97 1 128/97 8~Hg~~B 35.00 .50 5.00 5 '80 2, 0 ------------------------ ------------ 47,50 47,50 ,00 *.***********..*.*..~*..*....................................................... * End of Case Information * ................................................................................ APPEAL LIC SUSP TAX ON APPEAL SETTLEMENT JCP FEE SUBPOENA 35.00 ,50 5,00 ~:88 ,00 ,00 ,00 :88 TRUE COPY FROM RECORD In Tostlmony wheleof. I here unto sel my hand and the seal of said c~ al Carlisla. Pa. This ~} '!. ~ ul 'e-.;.._. 19 'ir -J... ~Y/~ tlL<.te.v1 ~, . Prothonotary /1 ~ ,...., X N D E X TO W X T N E S S E S FOR THE COMMONWEALTH DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS None FOR THE PETITIONER DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS John Patrick Kline 5 10 John Albert Abom 14 18 19 ----------------------------- I N D E X 'I' 0 E X H I BIT S FOR THE COMMONWEALTH MARKED ADMITTED No, 1 - driving record 3 5 FOR THE PETITIONER MARKED . ADMITTED No, 1 - conviction documents 5 22 No, 2 - letter 5 22 No, 3 - Virginia statute 22 22 .J'I ~ jIIllII\ 1 2 3 May 20, 1990 Courtroom No. 1 1144 p.m, 4 (Whereupon, 5 Commonwealth'e Exhibit No, 1 6 was marked for identifioation.) 7 THE COURT I This is the time and place for a 8 hearing on the petition for appeal from license suspension 9 filed by John Patrick Kline, We will let the record 10 indicate that the Petitioner/Appellant is present in court 11 with his counsel, Robert Kline, Esquire, and the 12 Commonwealth is represented today by George l(abusk, Esquire. 13 Are counsel ready to proceed? 14 15 16 17 MR, KLINE: Yos, Your Honor. MR, KABUSKI Yes, Your Honor, THE COURT: All right, Mr, Kabusk. MR, KABUSK: Your Honor, what's been marked 18 Commonwealth's Exhibit No, 1 consists of three subexhibits. 19 Subexhibit No, 1 is official notice of suspension dated and 20 mailed 9/4/97, effective 10/9/97, and that notice tells the 21 motorist, John Patrick Kline, operator's number 21739540, 22 Dear Motorist: Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code requires 23 the Department to treat certain out of state convictions as 24 though they had occurred in Pennsylvania. Therefore, as a 25 result of the Department receiving notification from 3 JO .~ ,-.. 1 virginia of your conviction on 7/9/1997 of an offense which 2 occurred on 6/1/1997, which is equivalent to a violation of 3 Section 3731 of the Pennsylvania VehJ.cle Code relating to 4 Driving under Influence, your driving privileges are being 5 suspended for a period of one year, as mandated by section 6 1532B of the Vehicle Code, 7 Subexhibit 2 is a record of conviction 8 detail, out of state driver violations report received by 9 the Department electronically from the state of Virginia. 10 Operating under the influence of liquor or drugs, date of 11 violation, 6/1/97, and date of conviction, 7/9/97. 12 Subexhibit 3 is the driving record which 13 appears in the file of the Defendant, John Patrick Kline, 14 operator's number 21739540, date of birth, 9/28/68, in the 15 Bureau of Driver Licensing, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 16 On Subexhibi t 2, I would direct your 17 attention to the reason for a conviction states, driving 18 while intox, first, And I move for the admission of 19 commonwealth's Exhibit No, 1, 20 21 that? 22 MR, KLINE: No objection to the admission of 23 the exhibit, Your Honor, other than the fact that, as THE COURT: All right, Any objection to 24 testimony will bear out, there is a mistake on that report, 25 and that is not the exact section to which the Petitioner 4 i - 1 was convicted, 2 THE COURTI All right, Commonwealth's 3 Exhibit 1 is admitted. 4 (Whereupon, 5 Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1 6 was admitted into evidence,) 7 MR, KABUSKI And that is the Department's 8 ca.., 9 THE COURT: All right, Mr, Kline, 10 MR, KLINE: Call John Kline to the stand, 11 (Whereupon, 12 Petitioner's Exhibits Nos. 1, and 2 13 were marked for identification,) 14 Whereupon, 15 JOHN PATRICK KLINE 16 having been duly sworn, testified as follows: 17 DIRECT EXAMINATION 18 BY MR, KLINE: 19 Q Please state your full name for the record, 20 A John Patrick Kline, 21 Q And what is your current legal address? 22 A 1804 Brandt Avenue, New Cumberland, 23 Pennsylvania, 24 Q Presently, for employment purposes, you're 25 staying in Baltimore, Maryland, is that correct? 5 -, -, 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 summons? I'm sorry, A Yeah, Q okay, On July 9, 1997, did you enter a guilty plea to any charge in Fairfax county, Virginia? A Yes, I did, Q What did you plead guilty to? A Drive or operate a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol concentration of ,008 percent or more by weight by volume or .08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath, THE COURT: in one of those answers, answer? We might have had an extra zero Was it .08 percent for each THE WITNESS: Yes, MR. KLINE: .08 percent or more by weight by volume or .08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath, THE COURT: All right, BY MR, KLINE: Q In regard to that document, it appears that other language is struck out, Did you observe that language being struck by any individual? A Yes, Judge Kimble struck that out, Q And you observed him do that? A That's actually a she. Yes. Q Oh, it's a she. I'm sorry, And Judge Kimble 7 .1' -.. ,'-' 1 driver's license, is that correct? 2 AVes. 3 Q For a period of 12 months in the state of 4 Virginia? 5 AVes, 6 Q When was that suspension effective? 7 A That was effective, I believe, the next day, 8 Q Okay, In Virginia, there is a restricted 9 operator's license where you were declared eligible for such 10 a license? 11 A Ves, I was, 12 Q I will now show you what's been marked as 13 Petitioner's Exhibit 2, a letter from the Commonwealth of 14 Virginia, Department of Motor Vehicles, Did you receive 15 that letter? 16 A Yes, I did, 17 Q And that letter indicates to you what? 18 A That my license has been suspended in 19 Virginia, 20 Q What was the length of that suspension? 21 A One year, 22 Q When was that effective? What was the 23 beginning date? 24 A July 9th, '97. 25 Q What was the end date of that suspension? 9 -; 1 2 ......, A July 8th, '98, I'm going to show you Subexhibit 1 ot Q 3 commonwealth Exhibit No, 1, which has already been admitted. 4 Did you receive that letter? 5 6 A Yes, I did, And that also involves a license suspension Q 7 being imposed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, is that 8 correct? 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A Yes, it does, Q What's the effective date of that suspension? The effective date is October 9th, '97, 1997. And what's the length of that suspension? A Q A One year, Q And when would that suspension expire? It would be October 8th, '98, MR. KLINE: That's all I have. Mr, Kabusk A 17 might have some questions for you, BY MR, KABUSK: Q Yes. Mr, Kline, did you take a breath test? A Yes, I did, Q What was the result of that? MR, KLINE: Objection, Hearsay, Your Honor. THE COURT: Hearsay? 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 :25 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk. CROSS EXAMINATION 10 I" ...... ,.-... 1 MR, KLINE: He's not certified in any way to 2 render an opinion as to what the result of any type of blood 3 alcohol test may have been, 4 THE COURT: Mr, Kabusk, do you have a 5 response to that? 6 MR, KABUSK: I'm aSking just as a fact if he 7 knows the result of the breath test, I don't think ho needs B to be an expert to be qualified to know the results, 9 THE COURT: All right. The obje.ction is 10 overruled, 11 THE WITNESS: What I was told, it was 1. -- I 12 believe it was .1B. 13 BY MR, KABUSK: 14 Q Now were you issued a citation in Virqinia? A Yeah, I believe that's what it was. Q Do you have a copy of that with you? A This was what I was issued, the exhibit that was presented here, Q Are you pointing to what was -- A The warrant of arrest - misdemeanor, locale 15 16 17 lB 19 20 21 on top, 22 23 Exhibit 1? THE COURT: Are you referring to Petitioner's 24 THE WITNESS: Yes, 25 THE COURT: All right, 11 3 ...... 1""'\ 1 BY MR. KABC5KI 2 Q 50 you're referring to the warrant of arrest? 3 A Yeah, that's what I was issued, 4 Q And you pled guilty to the Virginia statute 5 which relates to driving a motor vehicle while intoxicated, 6 is that correct? 7 A No, 8 Q What did you plead guilty to? 9 A I pled guilty to drive or ope~ate a motor 10 vehicle while having a blood alcohol concentration of .08 11 percent or more by weight by volume or 0,8 grams or more per 12 210 liters of breath, 13 THE COURT: Do you mean .08? 14 THE WITNESS: ,08, 15 THE COURT: All right, 16 BY MR, KABUSK: 17 Q The title to that section is driving motor 18 vehicle engine, etc., ,while intoxicated, is that correct? 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A (No response,) Q I'll str ik:e the question, MR. KABUSK: No further questions. THE COURT: Mr, Kline. MR. KLINE: No questions, THE COURT: You may step down, Thank: you, MR, KLINE: Next witness is John Abom. 12 / ~ 1 Whereupon, 2 JOHN ALBERT ABOH 3 having been duly sworn, testified as follows: 4 THE WITNESS: Good afternoon, Your Honor, 5 THE COURT: Good afternoon. 6 MR, KABUSK: Your Honor, at this time I would 7 offer an objection to Mr, Abom's testimony on the basis of 8 relevance of his testifying in this courtroom, 9 THE COURT: Mr. Kline, do you want to make an 10 offer of proof with respect to this testimony? 11 MR. KLINE: The offer of proof with respect 12 to Hr, Abom's testimony would be the requirements and 13 consideration given by the Cumberland County District 14 Attorney's Office in making determinations on admission of 15 ARD and as to the period of suspension for individuals who 16 participate in the ARD program, either the regular ARD 17 program or the guardian interlock program. 18 As far as the relevance, there are 19 constitutional issues, specifically dealing with equal 20 protection, freedom from arbitrary action of government, and 21 full faith and credit of the Federal constitution that are 22 involved, And while I understand Judge Hess has renderod an 23 opinion not considering those decisions, that case is up to 24 the Superior court, and I would at least like the 25 opportunity to place this testimony on the record aa, it 13 ~6 ".", BY MR, KLINE: Q A Q A Office. Q 14 'II "....., -', 1 A I'm an Asaistant District Attorney. 2 Q And in your job as Assistant District 3 Attorney, do you have any involvement in the Cumberland 4 County ARD program? 5 A I am assigned the responsibility of 6 administering our county's ARD program. 7 Q In the course of administering the ARD 8 program, can you state what criteria are used in Driving 9 under the Influence cases to determine whether a Defendant 10 is ARD eligible? 11 A I can try, I think there are four general 12 13 14 15 16 17 a prior ARD disposition of a prior DUI case, but we also 18 look at individuals' prior criminal history, convictions 19 under, say, Title 18 or Title 35, and there are certain 20 types of other, when I say other convictions, other than 21 DUI, Driving under the Influence, that may exclude someone 22 from being considered in the ARD program. 23 In addition to the reviewing someone's prior 24 criminal history, we look at the specific case itself, 25 Under Title 75, Section 3731, Subsection 0, we are precluded categories, and I'll start with the first initial screening. When a case has been bound over and comes to our office, a case is reviewed to see whether an individual has a prior criminal record, specifically in the DUI case, whether a person has a prior Driving under the Influence conviction or 15 'f) --. ~ 1 from allowing certain cases into ARD. Those are enumerated 2 in the statute. But to summarize, if you've committed other 3 offenses at the same time of the particular DUI, there's 4 certain offenses that would exclude you, 5 We look at whether there's been an accident 6 and other people other than the driver of the vehicle has 7 been injured, After that review has been completed, and if 8 the person doesn't have a prior record and doesn't have a 9 prior DUI, hasn't committed other types of offenses, then we 10 ask a Defendant to sign a waiver of his Rule 1100 rights, 11 There are certain requirements, and I'll put this in the 12 second category, throughout the ARD process, The Defendant 13 has to meet certain obligations, go to certain counseling, 14 or at least do an evaluation, meet certain appointments with 15 our offices, return forms, fill them out, pay fees, 16 If they fail to meet any of those 17 requirements, that would be a basis for us to, say, to not 18 recommend them for entrance into the ARD program to the 19 Court, We also receive input from various, and I'll say a 20 third category is, input from parties involved with a DUI 21 case, including generally the police officer, any other 22 individuals who might be involved in a case, such as 23 passengers, people who have had property damage or people 24 who are involved in an accident with the person who's been 25 charged, and we ask their input as to whether this person 16 I- ~) -.. J-'~_ 1 should be considered for ARD, I think I've stated four 2 categories, I hope I have, I don't know, 3 Q At the presont time, is the blood alcohol 4 level used as a consideration in Cumberland County? 5 A Not in Cumberland County. 6 Q Assuming an individual follows all the 7 program as you described, completes all the requirements, 8 and is admitted into the ARD program, what, from your 9 experience, what type of -- what period of time is their 10 license typically suspended? 11 A Well, it depends -- let me first say, we 12 don' t admit them into the ARD program, The Court does, ~Ie 13 move for their admission into the program, But if the Court 14 does admit them, it's actually the Court that sets the 15 suspension by statute. It's got to be at least one month, 16 and it can't be more than twelve months in Cumberland 17 county. Judge Hess has set the standard, and I'll explain 18 this term, standard ARC program license suspension for six 19 months, that being someone who is entered -- accepted into 20 the program, their license would be suspended with the 21 Department of Transportation for a period of six months, 22 There is another option, which would be to 23 participate in ARD and also undergo or participato in the 24 guardian interlock program. And in that particular case, an 25 individual's license would be under suspension for a period 17 '/ ( ~\ .... 1 THE COURT: Mr, Kline. 2 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 3 BY MR, KLINE: 4 Q In the event that an individual is admitted 5 into the ARD program and then revoked, what occurs at that 6 time to its criminal case? 7 A The case would be assigned for formal 8 arraignment, and they would go through the criminal process 9 as if they had not participated in the ARD program. 10 MR, KLINE: Thank you, 11 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk, anything further? 12 MR, KABUSK: Nothing further. 13 THE COURT: You may step down, Thank you. 14 May Mr. Abom be excuoed? 15 MR. KLINE: Yes, he may, 16 THE COURT: Mr, Kabusk, 17 MR, KABUSK: Yes, he may, 18 THE COURT: You're excused, Thank you. 19 MR, KLINE: Your Honor, at this point I move 20 for the admission of Petitioner's Exhibits 1 and 2. 21 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk, any objection to the 22 admission of those items? 23 MR, KABUSK: Yes, I do object to, I think 24 what's been identified as Petitioner's Exhibit No.1, if I 25 could just look at them, 19 y, ,'''...... .- 1 THE COURT: The objection being based upon 2 what? 3 MR, KABUSK: I didn't see it had a seal on 4 it, Your Honor, That was my initial objection, I just 5 would object to the strike provisions, just give it the 6 weight that it's entitled, Your Honor, 7 THE COURT: I'm not quite clear whether you 8 have objected now to that item or not, 9 MR, KABUSK: Well, I object to that document 10 based on best evidence, and I'm specifically referring to 11 the little i that's been written in and to the portion 12 that's been striked out -- stricken out, 13 THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Kline, do you have a 14 response to that? 15 MR, KLINE: Your Honor, all I can state is, 16 that's what was provided to me, It was obtained by the 17 Petitioner's Virginia counsel, directly from the Clerk of 18 Court in Fairfax County, I, quite frankly, when I received 19 that, I questioned the fact that there was no embossed seal, 20 just the blue stamp, and I contacted the Fairfax County 21 Clerk, and they said, that's what they do, They don't have 22 an embossed seal, 23 As far as the portion being struck out, I can 24 state that I was in contact with the Virginia counsel prior 25 to the entry of this plea, and going in before July of '97, 20 1/ ~ --- 1 the intention was to enter a plea to that partioular 2 subseotion, virginia counsel and the Petitioner both 3 advised me that is what occurred, and the documents so 4 reflect it, The Petitioner has testified that he personally 5 observed Judge Kimble strike out that language that is 6 marked and to which Mr, Kabusk is objecting. 7 THE COURT: You're representing that, to the 8 best of your knowledge, that exhibit was not tampered with? 9 MR, KLINE: Absolutely, to the best of my 10 knowledge, While I don't personally know the Virginia 11 counsel, he was referred to me by a law school classmate of 12 mine, which I hold in the highest regard, and I have no 13 reason to question his integrity by any means, 14 THE COURT: By integrity, do you mean, to the 15 best of your knowledge, the striking shown on that exhibit 16 was done by the judge in the case? 17 MR, KLINE: To the best of my knowledge, and 18 having gone to school in Virginia, Virginia traffic courts 19 are probably even more informal than our District Justice 20 courts, and it would not surprise me in the least bit that'. 21 how a judge handled that particular plea, 22 THE COURT: Mr, Kabusk. 23 MR. KABUSK: Nothing further regarding that. 24 THE COURT: We'll admit Petitioner's Exhibits 25 1 and 2, 21 t ' """" ,-. 1 (Whereupon, 2 Petitioner's Exhibits Nos, 1 and 2 3 were admitted into evidence,) 4 THE COURT: Are we going to have a copy of 5 the Virginia statute marked as an exhibit? 6 MR, KABUSK: r have a copy. 7 MR, KLINE: I have a copy prepared, 8 (Whereupon, 9 Petitioner's Exhibit No, 3 10 was marked for identification,) 11 MR, KLINE: I also move for the admission of 12 Petitioner's Exhibit 3, Your Honor, which I understand would 13 be admitted by stipulation of counsel, 14 THE COURT: Mr, Kabusk, are you in agreement 15 that Petitioner's Exhibit 3 is the Virginia statute at issue 16 in this case? 17 MR, KABUSK: Yes, Your Honor. 18 THE COURT: All right, Petitioner's Exhibit 19 3 is admitted, 20 (Whereupon, 21 Petitioner's Exhibit No, 3 22 was admitted into evidence,) 23 MR, KLINE: The petitioner rests, Your Honor. 24 THE COURT: All right, Mr, Kabusk. 25 MR, KABUSK: Nothing further, Your Honor, 22 J i ~'" 1 THE COURT: Okay, Did counsel have any 2 briefs or arguments they wished to make at this time? 3 MR, KABUSKI Yes, Your Honor. 4 THE COURT: All right, 5 MR, KABUSK: I have a brief prepared, and I 6 will attach copies of some of the cases that I will be 7 citing, I've provided you with the Sutherland case and the 8 E~ case which address the ARD constitutional equal 9 protection issues, as wall as the Gnazzo case, Just as a 10 matter of background, the Sullivan case and the Audrev 11 Fisher case, which is a Driver's License Compact case out of 12 New Hampshire where the Court goes through an analysis of 13 Now Hampshire statute and the lang\lage that they have, 14 New Hampshire states, DUI, No person shall 15 drive or attempt to drive a vehicle upon any way", while 16 such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor, 17 And the Court found that is substantially similar under the 18 compact. The compact states that at IV(c), it talks about, 19 the words need not be precisely the same words but the 20 offenses or violations have to be of substantially similar 21 nature, 22 And, 'four Honor, I would argue that in this 23 case, that under the statute, the two intoxicating statutee 24 prohibit the same type of conduct and, therefore, would be 25 substantially similar, Also, the Compact is remedial in 23 ';0 1 nature and must be construed iiberally, There's some other 2 states that have addressed making comparisons, I oited 3 those in my brief. And in this case, I just noticed the 4 language of the statute, and this is a later revision of it 5 then the statute that I have, and it states, under the first 6 section, the charge alleging a violation of this section 7 shall support a conviction under the clauses one, two, 8 three, and four, 9 And I would reason that any charge under the 10 Virginia statute, under the four sections, is a general 11 charge of driving while intoxicated. And I would argue that 12 these two statutes are trying to keep drunks off the road, 13 and those are SUbstantially similar in nature, Your Honor. 14 THE COURT: That last item that you were 15 reading from is what? 16 MR. KABUSK: The Virginia statute that I 17 stipulated to, 18 THE COURT: Oh, I see. 19 MR. KABUSK: And I will provide the court, as 20 well as Mr, Kline, a copy of the statute that I had, and you 21 can see that it was revised, 22 THE COURT: Are we in disagreement then on 23 the statute? 24 MR. KABUSK: No, I can see that this is a 25 later revision than I had. 24 5' l -~ 1 THE COURT: I see. 2 MR. KABUSK: And I would argue in this case 3 that we need not focus on ,8, Virginia statute says, ,8 or 4 more. There is testimony that he testified that he was told 5 it was -- he was ,18. pennsylvania's is ,10, So baaed on 6 that, Your Honor, I would argue that the appeal be dismissed 7 and the suspension be sustained, 8 THE COURT: But he didn't plead to more than 9 ,08, he pled to .08 or greater. 10 MR. KABUSK: That's the statute, I would 11 argue that ,08 and ,1 are going after the same conduct, Your 12 Honor. 13 THE COURT: To be more exact, he pled to ,08 14 and did not plead to ,10, 15 MR. KABUSK: Well, the statute was ,08 or 16 more, and I have a brief here I'll submit. 17 THE COURT: And those cases that you cited, 18 Mr. Kabusk, can you give the cites for the record? 19 MR. KABUSK: For the record, the Audrev 20 Fisher case is 2734 C,D. 1997, filed March 30th, 1998, 21 Gnazzo v, commonw~alth of pennsvlvania Decartment of 22 Transcortation, Cumberland county Case 97-5408 CIVIL, 23 THE COURT: I think that opinion was dated 24 February 12, 1998. 25 MR. KLINE: That's correct, Your Honor. 25 ') ) -., ..-., 1 THE COURT: All right, 2 MR, 1<ABUS1<: ~ed v, Commonweal th, 409 A, 2d 3 1185, sutherland v, commonwealth, 407 A,2d 1364. And 4 Sullivan v, PennDOI is 0023 W,D, Appeal Docket 1997, and 5 that was February 26th, 1998, 6 THE COURT: All right, Thank you. Mr. 7 1<line, 8 MR. 1<LINE: First of all, '{our Honor, I'm not 9 going to address the various issues that Judge Hess has 10 already ruled on, but I want to make it clear, I'm not 11 waiving those as well, In regard to Driver's License 12 Compact, licensing authority in the home state for purposes 13 of suspension, revocation, or limitation of the license to 14 operate a motor vehicle shall have the same effect to the 15 conduct reported, pursuant to Article III of the Compact, as 16 if -- it would if such conduct had occurred in the home 17 state, and specifically says, driving a motor vehicle while 18 under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic 19 drug or under the influence of any other drugs to a degree 20 which renders the driver incable of safely driving a motor 21 vehicle. 22 The Petitioner in this case was not convicted 23 of such an offense. He was convicted of a strict statutory 24 offense of driving at or above a certain blood alcohol 25 content. Therefore, my argument is, that particular portion 26 I- """ ,- , 1 of the Compact does not apply, and the Department cannot 2 suspend on the basis of that particular section, However, 3 the Department does have a catch-all underneath that as to 4 other convictions, 5 The licensing authority in the home state 6 shall give such effect to the cor-duct as is provided by the 7 laws of the home state, The conduct here was driving at a 8 blood alcohol level of .08 percent or greater, which is not 9 a violation of any pennsylvania statute whatsoever. Based 10 upon that factor alone, the conduct is not the same, and the 11 Department does not have authority to suspend the operating 12 privileges. 13 In regard to the last -- next to last 14 sentence of t.he Section 18,2 - 266, which Mr. Kabusk asserts 15 makes virginia OWl statute all-inclusive for the most part, 16 I interpret that as reading, again I'll state, charge 17 alleging a violation of this section shall support a 18 conviction under clauses one, two, three, or four, My 19 position on that, and you can take it from the exhibit, the 20 third page of the exhibit, which is the actual summons, just 21 states, OWl. It doesn't include one, two, three, and four, 22 In Pennsylvania, as you're well aware, a 23 police officer on the citation must allege each and every 24 subsection of the DUI statute, so when it comes to 25 preliminary hearing, if each of those points isn't proven, 27 ." ~, 1 the case is going to be tossed, It's not standard in 2 Pennsylvania for a police officer just to allege one 3 subsection, and it's not standard in Pennsylvania for a 4 police officer just to allege the 3731 violation either, 5 You have 3731, then each of the subsections that's being 6 alleged which, of course, a major, if not all, of the cases 7 are all-inclusive, 8 I interpret this sentence of the Virginia 9 Code Section to simply say, a police officer doesn't have to 10 bother with that, Charge him with the DWI, and let the 11 Courts sort it out, And that's what happened here, and the 12 Court sorted it out, and the plea was entered, And quite 13 frankly, there's no similar conduct whatsoever in the 14 Pennsylvania Vehicle Code or Criminal Code which would 15 justify a suspension. 16 THE COURT: I gather that neither counsel has 17 a case directly on point where the statute provided for a 18 .08 percent offense in the foreign state and the home state 19 provides for a ,10 percent violation? 20 MR, KLINE: No cases exactly on point, Your 21 Honor, that I'm aware of, However, the Olmstead case out of 22 the Commonwealth court, 677 A,2d 1285, 1996, involved a New 23 York driving while impaired statute, Admittedly, New York 24 does also have a driving under the influence statute, In 25 the Olmstead case, the Commonwealth Court held that the 28 ) 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 -\ ~. driving while alcohol impaired was not equivalent to Pennsylvania's driving under the influence statute, THE COURT: Mr, Kabusk, I think you had a brief that you wanted to hand up, MR, KABUSK: Yes, Your Honor, I've attached some relevant cases, THE COURT: All right, We'll take a brief recess and enter an order in this case, (Whereupon, a recess was t~ken at 2:27 p.m, and proceedings reconvened at 2:39 p,m.) THE COURT: I think both sides of this case have made a good record for purposes of any appeal, and we will enter this order, (Whereupon, the following Order of Court was entered, ) ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 28th day of May, 1998, upon cOI.sideration of the appeal of petitioner/Appellant from the suspension of his driving privilege by notice dated September 4, 1997, from Respondent/Appellee, and following a hearing, the appeal is sustained, and the suspension is reversed. By the Court, Isl J. Wesley Oler. Jr. J. 29 ',l . ...... ~ "( i 7 '~ ~ JOHN PATRICK KLINE Pctitioncr : IN nm COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v, COMMONWEALTH OF : CIVIl. ACTION --I.AW PENNSYL VANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT 1\ TION, Rcspondcnt : No. 97-5405 CIVIL TERM IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO PA. R.A.P, 1925 OLER, J., Augu~t 17, 1998. This Iiccnse suspension case presents thc issue of whcthcr a Pcnnsylvania Iiccnsce's conviction in Virginia for the offense of driving with a blood alcohol content levcl of .08 perccnt or greater will result in a suspcnsion of his Pennsylvania (Jpcrating privilege undcr the Driver's License Compact. This coun concluded that such a suspension was not dictated by the compact. The Department of Transportation has appealed to thc Commonwealth Court from the court's order sustaining the Iicensee's appeal from the suspension. This opinion in suppon of the court's order is wrillen pursuant to Pennsylvania Rulc of Appellate Procedure 1925(a). STATEMENT OF FACTS Petitioner is John Patrick Kline, an adult individual residing at 1804 Brandt Avenue, New Cumberland, Cumberland County. Pennsylvania. Respondent is the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation. On July 9, 1997, Petitioner pled guilty in Fairfax County, Virginia, to a charge of "driv[ingJ or operatlingl a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 pcrccnt or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath:' The conviction expressly excludcd any liability for driving "while under the influence of , 'i '/ ...."" r alcoholl.1 or while under the influence of any narcotic drug or uny OIher self-udmlnistered inloxicant or combined influence of alcohol and any drug 10 a degree which impaired Ihe accused's ability to drive or operate a motor vehicle safcly.'" By notice dated Seplember 4. 1997. Respondent suspended Petitioner's operaling privilege in Pennsylvania for a period of one year as a result of the Virginia conviction. The notice advised in part as follows: Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code requires the Department to treat certain out of state convklions as though they had occurred in Pennsylvania. Therefore. as a result of the Department receiving notifieation from VIRGINIA of your convietion on 07/09/1997 of an offense which occurred on 06/01/1997. which is equivalent 10 II violation of Section 3731 of the Pa. Vehicle Code. DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE, your driving privilege is being SUSPENDED for a period of I YEAR(S), as mandated by Section 15328 of the Vehicle Code.2 Pelitioner appealed from the notice of suspension to this court on October 2. 1997. A hearing on the appeal was held on May 28, 1998.' At the conclusion of the hearing, the following order of court, from which the Department of Transportation has appealed, was entered: AND NOW. this 28th day of May, 1998, upon consideration of the appeal of Petitioner/Appellant from the suspension of his driving privilege by notice dated September 4, 1997, from Respondents/Appellee. and following a hearing, the appeal is sustained. and the suspension is reversed. I Petitioner's Exhibit 1. 2 Commonwealth's Exhibit 1. J The hearing had been continued at Petitioner's ,'equest with the concurrence of Respondent's counsel. See Order of Court. February 12, 1998. 2 I( (""'\ ,-, DISCUSSION Article IV of the Driver's License Compacl,' which has been enacted by Ihe commonwealths of bOlh Pennsylvania and Virglnill, provides as follows: Effect of Conviction (II) The licensing aUlhorilY in Ihe home state [Pennsylvania in Ihis casel, for the purposes of suspension, revocation or limitation of Ihe license to operate a molor vehicle, shallgi ve the same effect 10 Ihe conducl reported, pursuanl 10 Article 111 [providing for reporting of convictions! of this compacl. as it would give If such conduct had occurred in Ihe home slate in Ihe case of convictions for: (I) manslaughter or negl igent homicide resulting from Ihe operation of a motor vehicle: (2) driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a narcotic drug or under the inj1uence of any other drug to a degree which renders the driver incapable ofsafe/y driving a motor vehicle,' (3) any felony in Ihe commission of which a motor vehicle is used: or (4) failure 10 stop and render aid in the event of a motor vehicle accident resulting in Ihe death or personal injury of another. **"'* (c) If the laws of a party state do not provide for offenses or violations denominated or described in precise{y the lVords employed in subdivision (a) of this article, such party state shaff construe the denominations and descriptions appearing in subdivision (a) of this article as being applicable to and identifying those offenses or violations of a substantially similar nature and the laws of such party state shaff contain such provisions as ml{Y be necessary to ensure that fuff force and 4 Act of December 10, 1996, P.L. 925. ~ 4, 75 Pa. e.S. ~ 1581 (1998 Supp.), ] t ( ,""'" ,.-. effect is givelllClthis article.' The statutory provision in Virginia which proscribes various forms of driving while intoxicated reads as follows: 1118,2-266, DrlvlnK motor vehicle. enKlnc, dc" while Intox\cllted. ete, .. It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor vehicle. engine or truin (i) whi/e such person has a blood alcohol COllcent/'CItioll of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 gmms or more per 2/0 liters of breath as illdicated by a chemical test admillistered as provided in this article. (H) while such person is undcr thc influence of alcohol. (Iii) while such person is undcr thc influence of any narcotic drug or any other self.administcred intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degrce which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle. engine or train safely, or (iv) whilc such person is under thc combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operatc any motor vehicle, cngine or train safely. A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (Hi) or (iv). For purposes of this section, the term "motor vchiclc" includcs mopeds, while operated on the public highways of this Commonwcalth.^ The statutory provision in Pcnnsylvania which proscribcs various forms of driving under the influcncc rcads as follows: (a) Offense defined, n A person shall not drive. operate or be in actual physical control of thc movemcnt of a vehicle in any of the following circumstances: 51d (emphasis added). ^ Va. Code Ann. g 18.2-266 (emphasis added); see Petitioner's Exhibit 3, 4 [( ) ~ ~ (1) While undcr thc influcncc of alcohol to a dcgrce which rendcrs the pcrson incapable of safe driving. (2) While under thc influcnce of any controllcd substance. as defincd in the act of April 14. 1972 (P.L. 233, No. 64). known as Thc Controllcd Substance, Drug. Device and Cosmetic Act. \0 a dcgree which rendcrs the person incapable of safc driving. (3) Whilc undcr thc combincd influence of alcohol and any controlled substance to degree which renders the person incapablc of safe driving. (4) While the amount of alcohol by weight in the blood of: (j) an adult is 0.10% or greater: or (jj) a minor is 0.02% or grcater.7 It is been held, for purposes of the compact, that a statute which proscribcs driving while one is "undcr the influcncc of intoxicating liquor" is substantially similar to Pennsylvania's proscription on driving under the influence of alcohol to a degree rendering one incapable of safe driving. Fisher v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of Transportation. 709 A.2d 1008 (Pa. Commw. 1998). On the other hand, it has been held that a statute which proscribes driving while one's ability to drive is "impaired by the consumption of alcohol" is not substantially similar to Pennsylvania's proscription on driving under the influence to a degree rendering one incapable of safe driving. Olmstead v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Department of Transportation. 677 A.2d 1285 (Pa. Commw. 1996), petition for allowance of appeal granted. 546 Pa. 698, 687 A.2d 380 (1997). In reaching this conclusion. the Olmstead Court noted that the driver in that case had not been convicted of conduct which would have 7 Act of June 15,1976, P.L.162, ~ I. as amended, 75 Pa.C.S. ~ 3731(a) (l998Supp.) (emphasis added). 5 i -, 1"", constituted an offense in Pennsylvania.'eI. At 12111l In the present case, Petitioncr was not convicted on the basis of conduct which would have constitut~>d the offense of driving under the influence in Pennsylvania, His c\lOviction expressly excluded any premise that his violation consisted of being statutorily "under the influence of alcohol" or even being "under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self.administered intoxicant or combined influence of alcohol and any drug to a degree which impaired [his I ability to drive or operate a mowr vehicle safely." The conviction was predicated solely upon a blood alcohol content level below that proscribed for an adult driver in Pennsylvania. Although the compact sub juelice is to be "liberally construed so as to effectuate the purposes thereof,"M a holding that no substantial differencc exists between a statute which makes it a crime to drive with a BAC levd of .10 percent and one which prohibits driving with fi BAC level twenty percent less than that would disregard the vigorous debate being engaged in by the Pennsylvania legislature over the wisdom of adopting such a lower standard in the Commonwealth and would. in the court's view. be oriented more to result than to fair interpretation. For the foregoing reasons, the court declined to uphold the suspension of Petitioner's operating privilege based upon his Virginia conviction.Y Robert P. Kline, Esq. 331 Bridge Strect P.O. Box 461 Ncw Cumberland, PA 17070-0461 Allorney for Petitioner M Act of Decembcr 10, 1996, P.L. 925. ~ 4, 75 Pa. C.S. ~ 1581 (1998 Supp.), 9 By reason of the court's disposition of Petitioner's appeal on the ground discussed. it was not neccssary to considcr various othcr grounds raiscd by Petitioner. (, ~ .. !l 'J 'I j ~ ~ lJ) .q< l' i:::: g '-, 0 '- i f j . ! ~... a' 9 .?;> g II!: ~ ] ~ . Q ] ~:~ ~! :~ 'ji.e- ~ g ~ II ~:~ ~ <] .~ ~. ] .s '8 ~~ ~.~ ~ ~ 'Ox iQ~ e j ~~ UJI'l (3 u .-i i~ "" 'E ~.;; O~ ",&1 o ~ au o~ E ~ ~x tz ~ ,," OUl UJ c <-:I ~ u:> (.) 6i " .9 ~ " "':=: Uw -5 t:: C. 0'" UJN " " "" ti: ~ c to- 0:: [is -6 ':: i~ ~ . o ,~;E~ c(OW L;JE2~ wu..l:t: ~ E 20 1-00 0< c ',.-"" <(:so .-, j Lt,D r,f')ttz "-' ..-. '''JO I UJoO:: :r.: i"" "J __ N") n. 0 1_< >~ ,r . 'r-i 0 ..... ~c ,'; 0-"" ~!a ..r .,; .) ~ ~ 0'" '" :'i ;.. '.. ' :i (" t- Q::: , 'J " J :z (" /' .1 ..1:: { I UJ UJ .J ." . .~ 'I r-J::> Ll<X) ?' ;:~I .. 00""" Z C> I: __ ~O '1 .. ' i ~:-l <<)C.: ~ ( , ~ ~..~ 7'. " ........-' I .~ l1i I~~ s~ . if if~> . '~i ~. . ~~i ffi ~ I~J ~ .~ IS", ij ili.'! '(3 Jr5.11 ~ "] ~ '. ~ :~ !l u 'J;! '.~D ~ .~ 6 '1 g ~ is 1;;:0 ',5 j~ is ] t~ c ~ ii ~ d f;;l ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~. 00 ~ ~ ~.~ ~ w;:; ~ z ~ .~ g ,: C z ~ ffi ,7, :r: ~ u. QI;' 0 ~.~ ~ ...- :g j ~ .~ ~ .~ .. " j ~D J ~"' .Co e ,8 :.8 .F: "" .5 ~ ~ 1 :, ! i . f ! oj ~ ,,-rFf ,. ~n 6 ~..~ i1 )0 i ,'~ m Sl ' < ~,.. ,,~ ill ~ Iil < ~ .';. . < '1;Z JI. I:: .s gl"" ~ ~ ~ 5 0 ;o!: gfi: ~ '" ~ i ~~ ~ 0 i ~ I L ~ i ~ 0 ~ - = ' .~. i1., c . ~ n I ".~ ~~' </. t"1 .. , l!l ' ,..'. 0 5 ;:< ~~ ~~ .~~ & ~ ~ . ~~ dC?,E--o- ~ D~. < Ul ~ Iil ~ e, ~ 1.. ~.~ I- d ~G:i~~~ () DDCo~ f J . if: . 0 .s .~ .~ o u ] " ~ .< .s :;; -5 " ~ .!! ] S Y ,; ". '...J -::: 'Lo 'r. ~ C ~ ~ ~ '- ""~ i@ '7 ~ [: 8 z '" ~ uJ " :x: ~ ~ 'g ~ 15. "0 ii: :;; ] t ~ u- '= 1:: 'c g ~'j u c: ,r, e ~ Y 2 ... ,0 .r;. - ..,1: " ~ :"l ,., '.' ~" - ,;. .l. ..i '''': ;: ~ :~ .' c. t ;! :~ :E: 'f. ez: ,. , <D r ~ .:r' '\.I .:: _ ' 3 .2. .~~ ,..i c: ~'.~ . .., ... 2!;-. . .., , ;.i, -, II) , I v) "J ;! f' ll'_' ,'. r-., m I ~, / ,....., - ~' 1..0 ,- . . ,- '; ~": c' . , , ~ ~ < ;;; ~ ,g "' ~ ~ ~ " OIl :E 'g ;., E ;;; -5 :;; ..t' E 1l " [:i ~ " ~ E " V1 , -5 ~ " " I., :;j I~ I .~ I'. ~ I ~ ,Q~ f'-r;. IJ~ ~~ ~~ '" o . ~ ~ '] e 'J 0'( " -5 " , ~ , " ~ .s .J -:r I~ ~, " ~ ~ C 0'( .5 l " .9 ~ 8 ,.; ~; g 8 " " . u L1. " 0 Y z ~~ci ~ ,,- ::) ,u c.Il ootV"l ;,.., c = c= u "., ,- or; 0 "B ~ ..t, tj Q..z ;; "I ~ c ,., . :5 ~ ~ .., ~ ,..., "i ~): ":l 0.. I- "oJ "1 'f. 5 ,~ ~ ~) ,~J "-" L J l...- ]' ~~ C ,. . '/ - :,. -/ r ., () \.l ~":b' '( r\ l/) ~ ", " ~ I" C ~;j::ifl "" :' Ci \:) ~ -of. ~ ~H ~ :io ~ ~ '" t:: \:) "" v: 'r. '" ~ ~).., 8 " ~ 17 ,\ I cl Lt ( (II ,\ " \( I. , ''1' . : :1'" ~ ": '.' ., ~ ',:it~:l ,j. ~ ,. ~. ... \ ; ~... ~ I" v' t+ , ~>') ~ ,,: "('J r. . 'II ' '~ ".,' ';' ", I,,~ I; ~! \. .l! ~ ~ ~,." . "l:'t. ' \.;."., \~ " ~;;..' \ ',i', ,; ..( '1'\: ,:~. '. ';'.1 :c \' '.1 '.' 'j; , ~ il~'~' . n ':' I f-' ,~Il:" ';' \..... 1." , "'J . J g "I. .,0,.. '''~- . ,~t., ~ ~. ,.' ........ ,. ...l' r . ~. g ~ '~ ~ e ...~ ~~ " \l ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ; ~ :~ ~ <U2 ~ .~ Q ~ I>. ,,":r :::G ~ ~ bolt1~~ ~ ;?, ~ ~~~~~ '-. b ~ ll~ ~ ~ r'i ! J~ I ~: ~ 1 ~. ~ i ~~.c. ~ · ~ '-j~ ~oSl"\ "" ;:; "!l. l.L 1;! ~:;~o '0 :<::"... ~ r ~ ~j ~.~ ~ ]"9~~ c F... .1!8." ~ j.~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ t!l ~P) 0 !l ~ ~ 0 U of. Z '-'" ~- ~ ~ M' ~:i > 0 ~ 1 .s ~ c 1 oJ, ~]] ~ ~ s E~ .9g .~ ~8.' 0 1;! := ~ 'i'~ !! !! 0 P.11] >>~~ 1; UJ ...l oS '€l !!. " '6h ~ ~ ~ ;; ~ .<:>'" 0 !t D~~:; 8 ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ & ~D ~ ..J ~ i-i S " 'oJ E"8 '8 u ':; r1 g ~~ :~ 8 2 u ~ ~ fl, '9 c' II) ~ ,~S Y'~~~Q. ~goEdi ,,0..: ~... ~~ ~:2 c ~ .- n'~ - '5 .s "" .l! "" o c<:S "3 ~ .9 il .= ~ i5'= ':;" :e ~ E a,'1 :5! ~ 0.'- ~ ~ '/I c;JJ ~ V") c 0 _ ~ E l"'!" I.: 0'-0- ... ~ e ~ ~j! G '; '~r. ~ 0 ODD i ~ e . . i5u il~ III ~OD I; I 1.' I! I'" :J , lJ " ';'1 ~ ::J ., , J: . , '1 ;~ I - .. I"' ~ ,:. '6 c e E 8 ... VI 0 ~ ':E S2 -\~ 0/ i l , 1 ~ .JoI .~ u :a ~ ~ 1~ ..I] -, ' !i i:i ~ .c 0 ~ .. Cl W ~ [ ] "" ,:., ~ j' .a c ~ ~~ ~ ~ IJ.. il " jJ p.el 'J ~ ~'VI 'J j' ~ " ~ " ~O!! " , :3 ~ ~ 6 ~ l: ~ .=' c i .) 'jl "" ~ s C' '~ '_ r: '" "'''' l~ ::: '';:; ":;; ~ ~~Ij,~ UJuJ ..~ 1)11] II: , <~ H~ ~~-'" c . ~~ .":: ] IJ , ~ 0 -:l ~'~ ;:.; 'j :. S '5 ; ~. o :J g " g -, ' l3 " z ~ ;j C!: . "I, ,~. '/ :;{JO ~D t: ILj DC -(OUI, )J '''0' ~DO OI,,~. !! 0 ;;: Dj~ ..' ~ '-' ~ ~ i1! l~ % ,....- . .=::=.:-::=.....: - -. ----- .-- ~ 0 IJ I" ~--- - '; > .. ,'_d, -- --- ~ J' !~ ~~<:C~ <t ~. '1 ~ 1 C'.:l~p..~~ 11 0-- I!l --. - .. l:- 'M iii · ~ ~~~ ~r+-"'!: - 0---" I~ j -J; ~~ ~ .5l~ r~~ ~ S .{ . ~ ~ G ~ Vi 9 v- J a \.; <! Ii r:-!it: w 2 a I Ii-- ! t ~' lu ('~ C t ~I ~ i 0 Ji ~ .:...! ~ < J ~~ ~~:t <>Ii! I V ~ I ~ (JJ ~ ~ ~a-I rr g I 151 X I ~ ~ 51 J ; t~ J ~ ~! ~g lu L . I I v~ -I.\gi~: >wJ a;~;~1 ~i~)~ I i ~ ~ r U. i I ~ C) i! ~ :1 0- 5 ~ ~! ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ;I~ ~ ! I ~ I ! · ~ ~ 0; 2l] ~ 8 ~~ 0 l/I I ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ :; 0 I ~ I~m ~.~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~bS~ ~s~ ~ .' f ~ ~~B g ~ ~ > ~ 0 0 ~~ ~ 0 _ ~. d 0 ~ )> I ,i I i~ i I !M . ~ m~ S :i .., I " I Ii I I~ ~ ." ~ I ~ l. I, 1 ,I ! I Lj! J 1- I -Ii I ! ill I i 11.1, ! · i.: . r ! J ! n I bj Ill: i j I II iI ~l !. I f;1 11111. ! , 'f \!l . :i-" D- . J--N I l5; I '" , . ; I . '-.\,1 ~" , .. \: .;.. itrji (':".:: , j., .I"1t .~ "" (_ 'iJ.' I' I . ~~; ~,IJ I';':: II ;. I -. 9 ' S"'. ~.;. ,...".. ~ :; . "' ~~II :<: .,1, m:t: ~ ;:: \.;1 ". ~.,' ."" ,ll'.Ill:ll ~. ,..- .'. I,ll r-. .c-I a: " . .. ,". r t'! [.: ,,~I,;.':..l',.t".. I~IOZ ~ ~ '~ 1:o';",'.!I';':OO~. - . ,.~,.., '~,.."'~-- \~.~ ~'~ r-, IJ,I I W . ,'.1'1 I~I I"~I ". lr ,,_ ) 1"... 0 . -........ z ;c .... . _ <C 0.. . t"lllllJ' ~.'" ~ ",.. .. ~l. .- (.0 \.;. r.. ~ ~ . U -([: q: CJ ..:~ l'k: 10'=") C.. ~T ~'r - ...... . ~ ~ \/ ~ .~ I ~ ~ 8 ~d ~~ I~ i ~ /\ ! ~ ~ ~ i ;i ..._~li<ClNlllN::!IIl:: ...-__N__..._ ~ I i I i f 00 o LO N . ..... II! B 0 a i ~ ~ DL.326 ~9/95) '-..~ r, CERTIFICA TION . DATE October 27,1997 I hereby certify that Rebecca L. Bickley, Director of Ule Bureau of Driver licensing of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. is the legal custodian of the Driver License records of the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. As the Director of the aforesaid Bureau. she has legal custody of the original or microfilm records which are reproduced In the attached certification. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND SEAL OF THIS DEPARTMENT THE DAY AND YEAR AFORESAID, 6-~:1~7 BRADLEY L. MALLORY, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING AND ANNEXED IS A FULL, TRUE AND CORRECT CERTIFIED PHOTOSTATIC COpy OF: 1) Official Notice of suspension dated & mailed 09/04/97, effective 10/09/97; 2) Record of Conviction Detail, Out of State Driver Violations Report received by the Department electronically from the State of VIRGINIA, operating under the Influence of liquor or drugs, date of violation 06/01/97, and date of conviction 07109/97, and 3) Driving Record, which appears In the file of the defendant JOHN PATRICK KLINE, operator's no. 21739540, date of birth 09/28/68, In the Bureau of Driver Licensing, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. CERTIFIED TO as prescribed by Sections 6103 and 6109 of the Judicial Code, Act of July 9, 1976, P.L. 586, as amended, 42 Pa.C.S. ~~6103 and 6109. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND SEAL THE DAY AND YEAR AFORESAID. <R~ .~ 1.' ~. t\.t~J~ .SEAL REBECCA L. BICKLEY. DIRE~R BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING Commonweolth'') fXHIBIT , , ./I-~)PJ/1?, we 'I '} 1 " "" 1""""\ 'i'.'2/,l,! (','tCll !l,',U,g=: "ICHA"O O. HOLCOMI ':(/11"'1"10".,,, COMMONWEiALTH 01 VIRGINIA DEPARTNliNT OF MOTOR VEHICLES POSTOFFICF.BOX 174/2 RICffMOND, VIRGINIA 1J1d9, 0001 STREET ADDRISS 2300 WEST BROAD STREiT 08/13/97 I H . FRANCIS H. NCCORMICK, CHIEF F NANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY DIVISION R H 412, HIGHWAY AND SAFETY BUILDING H RISBURG, PA 17123 IS TO CEijTIFY THAT THIS MACHINE PRODUCED DOCUMENT IS AN ACTUAL ACCOUNT NVICTION INFORMATION RECEIVED BY ELECTRONIC MRANS FROM THE COURT IS) CATED BELOW. RICHARD O. HOLCOMB, COMMISSIONER IVIR LICINSI NUMBIR ST NAM! DOl .11 ,I 739UO PA KLINK, JOHN P 09/2B/68 If . ADORISS CITY/STAll/ZIP PLIA Ot BRANDT AVI NIW CUMBERLAND PA 17070 GUILTY RIAION O' CONVICTION 0" DATI CONY DATI CMV IIAZ lYING WHILI INTO., 1ST 06/01/97 07/09/97 ICTION COOl CT DOCKIT TAG COURT JUIIIIDICTlON/TVPI 8.2-266 97083550A1 AET0151 FAIRFAX COUNTY GIN DI8 CT " IVIR LICINO NUMBIR IT NAM! DOl 1111 , . ADDAIII CITY /STATI/ZIP PUA RIAION OF CONVICTION 0" DATI CONY DATI CMV IIAZ CONVICTION COOl CT DOCKIT TAD COUIIT JURIIDICTlON/TV'1 DRIVIR L1CINII NUMBIR IT HAMI DOl ADDRII. CITY /ITATI/ZIP PLIA RIAION O' CONVICTION 0" DATI CONY DATI CMV HAl CONVICTION COOl CT ODCKIT TAG COUIIT JIIRIIOICTlON/TV'1 ," ',,_..,:' ", I', " ." '.', 1tJ.. 'i ',J