Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-03859 Y 3 2 a 0 14, 3 f ,a G?o > .L LISA A. OWENS V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. ORDER AND NOW, this Z? day of 1999, upon Petition of LISA A. OWENS, a hearing is set on the License Suspension Appeal for the _a ,-J- day of?Ao'.a/,??Q„?) , 1999, at 07%30 o'clock ?.m., in courtroom No.of the Cumberland County Courthouse, One Courthouse Square, Carlisle, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, all proceedings to stay meanwhile. Pursuant to Section 1550(b) of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, Petitioner's appeal shall act as an automatic supersedeas, and Petitioner's operating privileges shall not be suspended pending final determination in this matter. uzl i BY THE COURT: :, , ., Y LISA A. OWENS V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA No. V(?. 2F5-9 a,?,Q 7 4. LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL AND NOW, comes LISA A. OWENS, by and through her attorneys, MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY, and files the following: 1. Petitioner, LISA A. OWENS, is an adult individual residing at 5 Altoona Avenue, Enola, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Respondent, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, has a mailing address at P.O. Box 68693, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 3. Petitioner received a notice of license suspension dated May 27, 1999, a copy of which is attached hereto, incorporated herein by reference, and marked as Exhibit A, for an alleged violation of Section 1547 of the Motor Vehicle Code, refusing to take a chemical test. 4. The suspension of the Petitioner's license is invalid, improper, and illegal for the following reasons: A. At the time she was stopped by the police officer, the officer did not have probable or reasonable cause to believe that the Petitioner violated any provisions of the Motor Vehicle Code or was driving under the influence of alcohol; B. The officer did not have a reasonable basis to stop the vehicle of the Petitioner; C. The officer failed to provide the Petitioner the requisite warnings concerning the consequences of failing to submit to a test of her breath, blood or urine; D. Petitioner did not refuse to take a breath or blood test. E. At all times relevant hereto, the Petitioner did not refuse to take a breath test. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays this Court to grant appeal from the license suspension. Respectfully submitted, MARCRB,, hGliBRs HERSHEY i TULLY I.D. # 103 2233 orth Front Street risburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 Attorney for Petitioner DATE: ??/ ?/ I verify that the statements made in the foregoing document are true and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ij i / ? DATE: ( i'? ?? COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA " - DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bureau of Driver Licensing Harrisburg, PA 17123 '- " MAY 27, 1999 " -- LISA A OWENS 991406101122306 001 5 ALTOONA AVE 05/20/1999 20902929 ENOLA PA 17025 12/03/1959 Dear Motorist: As a result of your violation of Section 1547 of the Vehicle Code, CHEMICAL TEST REFUSAL on 05/07/1999, your driving privilege is being SUSPENDED for a period of 1 YEAR(S). In order to comply with this sanction you are required to return any current driver's license, learner's permit and/or temporary driver's license (camera card) in your possession no later than the effective date listed. If you cannot comply with the requirements stated above, you are required to submit a DL16LC Form or a sworn affidavit stating that you are aware of the sanction against your driving Privi- lege. Failure to comply with this notice shall result in this Bureau referring this matter to the Pennsylvania State Police for prosecution under SECTION 1571(a)(4) of the Ve- hicle Code. Although the law mandates that your driving privilege is under suspension even if you do not surrender your license, Credit will not begin until all current driver's license product(s), the OL16LC Form, or a letter acknowledging your sanction is received in this Bureau. WHEN THE DEPARTMENT RECEIVES YOUR LICENSE OR ACKNOWLEDGE- MENT, 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. The effective date of suspension is 07/01/1999, 12:01 a.m. WARNING: If you are convicted for driving while your license is I Isuspended, the penalties will be: not less than 90 days imprison-] Iment and a 1,000 fine and an additional 1 year suspension. I A 991406101122306 Please see the enclosed application for restoration fee in- formation. APPEAL You have the right to appeal this action to the Court of Common Pleas (Civil Division) within 30 days of the mail date of this letter, MAY 27, 1999. If you file an appeal in the County Court, the Court will give you a time-stamped certified copy of the appeal. Send this time-stamped cer- tified 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 Sincerely, (?&" ?' f?? Rebecca L. Bickley, Director Bureau of Driver Licensing SEND FEE/LICENSE/DL-16LC/TO: INFORMATION (7:00 AM TO 9:00 PM) Department of Transportation IN STATE 1-800-932-4600 Bureau of Driver Licensing OUT-OF-STATE 717-391-6190 P.O. Box 68693 TOD IN STATE 1-800-228-0676 Harrisburg, PA 17106-8693 TDD OUT-OF-STATE 717-391-6191 I, P. RICHARD WAGNER, ESQUIRE, of the law firm of MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY, hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document to the attorneys or parties of record in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing a copy of the same in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on the 9 ,9 M? day of w , 19at the address listed below: Matt Haeckler, Esquire Office of Chief Counsel Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 103 Transportation and Safety Building Harrisburg, PA 17120 By. MANCKE, GNER, HERSHEY & TULLY 22 orth Front Street arrisburg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 r ? J J v ¢ >* Z-j 0 w Q ?< 0 c tj 3 ud W D s x = g N z cr Q w WE DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT m_ THE WITHIN IS A TRUE AND COR rau ,wi?AFe. w6rilEO To ni€ RECT COPY OF THE ORIOINAL rn..r nii,.i. a Wince neeva.ee ro me FILED IN THIS ACTION w ixo°HeErweerr Ixol o.re rnau BY MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY w?°iFeer:inmo .a?uxer :w uexr ATTORNEY JUN 8 1999VI) F be" OW you w now under arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance pursuant to swim 3731 01 code. th's rcte )bfSx1hjClea or urine. Officer chooses aw clwcloal wL) Vtwafn3 a1m you submit w • clrerrtk+N wet o1 duty, as a poke olfoer, w Inform you Hal It you roluse to submit w ore chemical lest your operating p( Mope will be suspended lot a al one year. consYluaanal rights you have as a criminal defendant. commoNy known as the Miranda Rights, Including the right w speak with a lawyer and the right to remain silent, apply only to criminal prosecutions and do not apply to tits chomlcal testing procedure under PennsyWartia's Implied Consent Low. which Is a civil, nor It crlminal prrscseding. b) You have no IkM w speak to a lawyer, or anyons also, flora taking Me chemical wet requested by Yw poke officer nor do you MW a 49M to remain spent when asked by Me peace offer to submit to ore chemical tool. Unless you Wee w submit to dw feet requested by ale poke officer row corrducl will be doomed to be refusal and your operaung privilage will be suspended for ono year. o) Your refusal to Submit to dwmfcal teeing under tie Impled Consent Law may be Introduced into evidence In s criminal prc secu ion for diving while under ohs influence of alcohol or o controlled substance. 1 carfy that I have read to above warning to tha regan Ing Me suspension of 1 oar oporaling privkege mdgav the grotorlst en opporw- / dry to submit to chemical testing. (?(/j !//-Z Q/ Signature of Oflic Qis+nr'r Dala: T I now eesn auwaaa. ?. ,,.......... Dale: Signature of Motorist: / D ¢?c MOIerIN refused to aqn, after being advised. .fin L?,yy.Glsw, Date: s??// / Signature of Officer : AFFIDAVIT 1. The above motorist was placed under arrest for diving under de Influents of alcohol or a controlled subslands In violation at Section 3731 at an Vehicle Code, and there were reasonable grounds to believe dW the above molori6t had been diving, operating or In actual physical control of ,he movement of a motor vehicle while under the Influence of alcohol Or a controlled substance or both. or TAM ats above named motorist was involved in en accident In Off" the operator or passenger of any vahlyde Involved or a pedestrian required Irsawwra at • ewdlal IaoYlty, or was killed. 2. The above malarial was requested to submit a chemical teadna as authorized by Section 1547 of the Vehicle Cods. 3. The above molprial was informed by • poke officer of the them" lest warnings contained in paragraph 3 and 4 above. 4. The above nomad malarial refused to submit to chomlcal leasing. ?jjs The refusal to sign this form Is not a refusal to submit to Ike oMmlosl lost. You must stiff give the material an epporttl- y to wee we Memlmi left attar reviewing this loss. 11 the Individual was operating a oojamosolal motor vehicle white having any alasilm or* e ssibeltad subsWwe In their system, you must alto oomplere the reverts s e of this1 m. aNM OAW$*Do iev?7 /GI. v. Cf--.._ Officer Signature:,e(ilvrp .LA •+ Officer Name: b W,,?M&N , COIr Cl?rP/UE!_/0 uS m i ore u o (TrW a Frsel = A fit' } I ?' .• ''` Badge Number: 17-8 ?J7urisdiction: COfW PILL P/ L Phone: L-7?) 73 .7 / - 1.57V U / S?2tt wr??N T Mailing Addle$ a Forward to: M) Comml331on ?i99 k63 Idfr.15, 2003 C>'JmP MLC PA ? 70 ? Ueparlmenl of Transponatb Bureau of Delver Licensing P.O. Box 2263 Nola: Any pertinent facts not covered by the altidevll should be submtlled on a Harrisburg. PA 17105 separate sheel and attached hereto. That shevl should Include the names of 61-L-qr} S2? additlonal witnesses necessary to prove the elements to which you have attested. THI>t FORM MAY BE DUPLICATED ADDITIONAL SUPPLIES OF THIS FOND MAY BE SECURED BY COMPLETING FORM 03-61 IA o41Mp MI CHEMICAL TESTING WARNINGS AND REPORT OF Q n(B ?IRS REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO CHEMICAL TESTING AS r ., tFt? AUTH(TR12ED BY a OF THE VEHICLE CODE' _. - ` - OL~DtlI CHEMICAL TESTING WARNINGS AND REPORT OF REFUSAL TO CHEMICAL TESI ING A* AUTHORIZED BY PIRIMMMOF THE VEHICLE CODE (COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE) 1. N ass, tislass lop #w you submit b a chemical Iasi of (breari, blood or wine. Cdcor chooses is chemical test.) 2. M is my duy. as a police officer, b Worm you Nat since you were operesing a CMV. 0 you soluse to submit to the chemical lost, your eommerew d*q pdWbpe will be disqualified for a minimum period of one year. 3. a) The Ionalkwilk" rights you haw o a criminal defendant, commonly known as the Miranda Rights, Including the right b speak wilh a lawyer and Yse d flat b resoaIn sileru, apply, ealy b aknlnalprosecution and do not apply to Bur chemical testing procadure undue Ponasylvan ia'a Implied Oaaesll Lae, which k a ciW, not a criminal proceeding. b) You have no right to spurt b a lawyer, at anyone also. before taking the chemical ass re"gled by the police officer nor do you have a right Io remain agent when asked by the poke ollkar b submit to tee chemical teal Unless you agree to submit so site lost requested by the poll officer your conduct will be doomed b be refusal and your commercial dnvinp privilege will be disqualified lor one year. e) Your relussl b submit to chemical lotting under the Implied Consent Law may be Introduced Into avldence In a criminal prosecution for driving while wader the InSnlanoe of aln14hol or a convoked substance. 1 cerily"l have read she above warning fo lie molorist regarding the disqualification of their commercial driving prlviage and gave the motodss an opportunity to SUM* to chemical leasing. Slit"krre of Offices: Date: I have been @"ad of the above. Signaure of Motorist: Dais: Masonisl refused to sign, otter being advised. Signature of Ollicur: Date: AFFIDAVIT 1. The shove-asawlsi was sapped by a police ollbar who, after slopping the mo14dsl, had reasonable grounds to believe the malarial had been driving a cmvmerclal motor vehicle while having any alcohol In his system. 2. The above molorkt was requested to submbs to chemical testing as authaired by Section 1613 of the Vehicle Code. 3. The above atobdst was Wormed by a police alsicer of site chemical lest warnings contained In paragraph 2 and 3 above. a. The above awtad motorist refused b submit to chemical testing. QEE The refusal b sign this lam Is not a fetuses to submit 60 she chemmcal tesL You must $94 give She 414101101 an opporaelly M lake Ina site m $L MN elves rovMwhtp Ws fes4L M gas Individual was paced under sweet for operating a caaatuslal motor vehicle while uodar the Npwnos el alesitel er a eMlrosted eublanve pursuant la session 3731 of gas Vehicle Code, you mueI sloe sample to the revere sae of able Term. officer Signature: Officer Name: Badge Number: Jurisdiction: Phone: (. 1 Making Address ADDITIONAL SWORMATION IF NOT THE SAME OFFICER WHO WITNESSED THE REFUSAL: Haase of ArteslInp Officer: _ Address W AI Nd4 Officer: Phofae Nuf" of Arw"*q Officer H Yes, aea e al ousbdan NeSse Seat address of asedical Iw ly 0 Wood was requested: is owe a Videotape? (Yes or No) _ and phone number ( _ ) w THIS FORM MAY BE DUPLICATED ADOni 10" SUPPI IES OF TI 06 FORM WAY BE SE CURED By COMPI ETWO FOW 09 a11 A Was; Is CW BMtp Odnaa: (Ct" r applicable) Word Hazardws Mawma Seib Carded: (earl if applicable) LISA A. OWENS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Petitioner CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : 99-3859 CIVIL TERM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, : Respondent LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL IN RE: APPEAL DENIED ORDER_ OF COURT AND NOW, this 2nd day of September, 1999, upon consideration of the Petitioner's appeal from license suspension, and following a hearing held on this date, the appeal is denied, and the license suspension based upon a chemical test refusal is affirmed. By the Court, ePpqesl-e-yy J P. Richard Wagner, Esquire Attorney for Petitioner George Kabusk, Esquire ? Attorney for Respondent 8•tP. O Ole r. , y rn r? 'u :srs LISA A. OWENS V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA C;IV1't NO. 99-3859 CAL TERM ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this i I day of October, 1999, upon consideration of the Notice of Appeal filed in the above-captioned matter, Appellant is DIRECTED, pursuant to Pa. R.A.P. 1925(b), to file of record in this Court and to serve upon the undersigned judge a concise Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal no later than 14 days after entry of this Order. P. Richard Wagner, Esq. 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 Attorney for Petitioner George Kabusk, Esq. w Office of Chief Counsel Pa. Department of Transportation 1101 south Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17104 Attorney for Respondent Court Reporter I bh3 lei 9. 'S. 61 1 :rc BY THE COURT, LISA A. OWENS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. 99-3859 CIVIL TERM COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS IN RE: LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL Proceedings held before the HONORABLE J. WESLEY OLER, JR., J. Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania on Thursday, September 2, 1999 in Courtroom No. 1 ; ?i is . APPEARANCES: GEORGE KABUSK, Esquire Attorney for PennDOT P. RICHARD WAGNER, ESQUIRE Attorney for Appellant FOR THE COMMONWEALTH Warren S. Cornelious INDEX TO WITNESS DIRECT CROSS 3 12 REDIRECT RECROSS 21 22 INDEX TO EXHIBIT COMMONWEALTH'S EXHIBIT NO. MARKED ADMITTED 1 - DL-26 form 10 11 2 I THE COURT: This is the time and place for a 2 hearing in the license suspension appeal case of Lisa A. 3 Owens v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of 4 Transportation. We will let the record indicate that the 5 Appellant is present in court with her counsel, P. Richard, 6 Wagner, Esquire, and the Commonwealth Department of 7 Transportation, is represented by George Kabusk, Esquire. 8 With him is officer Cornelious of the Camp Hill Borough 9 Police Department. Mr. Kabusk? 10 MR. KABUSK: Yes, Your Honor. With official 11 notice dated May 27, 1999, the Department notified Lisa A. 12 Owens, Operator's No. 20 902 929, that as a result of her 13 violation of Section 1547 of the Vehicle Code, chemical test 14 refusal on 5/7/99, her driving privilege was being suspended 15 for a period of one year. 16 The Department now calls officer Warren 17 Scott Cornelious. 18 PTL. WARREN SCOTT CORNELIOUS 19 having been duly sworn, testified as follows: 20 DIRECT EXAMINATION 21 BY MR. KABUSK: 22 Q Officer Cornelious, please state your name 23 and spell your full name. 24 A My name is Warren Scott Cornelious, 25 C-o-r-n-e-l-i-o-u-s. 3 1 Q Where are you employed? 2 A As a uniform patrol officer with the Camp 3 Hill Police Department, Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, in 4 Cumberland County. 5 Q During the course of your official duties, 6 have you had occasion to investigate an alleged incident of 7 DUI on or about May 7th of 1999? 8 A Yes, I did. 9 Q Would you tell the Court about that 10 incident? 11 A It was a Friday evening. I was working the 12 11:30 to 7:30 -- 11:30 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. shift in full 13 uniform, in a marked patrol vehicle, when at our about 0024 14 hours, or 12:24 a.m., I was pacing a vehicle which was in the 15 passing lane on the Camp Hill Bypass, and began in the area 16 of Brentwater Road. While pacing that vehicle, I noted that 17 the vehicle was weaving within its lane from the center line 18 of the roadway to the fog line of the roadway. I continued 19 to follow that vehicle. 20 Once in the 2500 block, the vehicle did 21 begin to slow. After clocking it three tenths of a mile, I 22 noticed that the vehicle was traveling 51 miles per hour in a 23 properly posted 35-mile-per-hour speed zone. The vehicle 24 then moved left, into the left turn lane, in the area of the 25 Christian Seibert Park, and continued to travel northbound in 4 1 the left turn lane. Just prior to reaching the concrete 2 divider, the vehicle veered right, back onto the passing lane 3 of the Camp Hill Bypass, and then entered the left lane to 4 turn north to travel north on 21st Street. It then pulled up 5 to the steady red traffic signal on the Camp Hill Bypass at 6 North 21st Street, where it did stop with me behind it. 7 We waited there for the light to cycle. 8 After the light cycled to green, the vehicle, which was in 9 front of me, remained in the stop position several seconds, 10 until which time the traffic signal turned yellow, and it 11 then negotiated the left turn to travel north onto 21st 12 Street. At that time, I activated my emergency warning 13 lights, proceeded through the yellow traffic signal in an 14 attempt to stop the vehicle. The vehicle eventually did 15 yield my warning and pulled to the curb area on North 21st 16 Street at the Holy Spirit Hospital entrance. I then 17 positioned my patrol car and began approaching the driver's 18 side of the vehicle, at which time the driver drove away from 19 the location of the stop. I got back into my vehicle, 20 activated my sirens, went after the vehicle, and did get it 21 stopped on North 21st Street between Ridge Road and Center 22 Street. 23 I again approached the drive r's side of the 24 vehicle, and this time I requested the driver to exhibit her 25 driver's license, registration and insurance card. The 5 1 driver then attempted to hand me her purse, but I advised her 2 that I would not take her purse and requested her to remove 3 the documentation from it, and she began searching it. I 4 noted that she was having difficulty grasping the document 5 and was fumbling with her wallet. She was eventually able to 6 provide me with a Pennsylvania driver's license and was 7 identified from that document as Lisa A. Owens, the lady that 8 is seated to the left of Mr. Wagner. 9 After providing me that document, Ms. Owens 10 asked me what additional documentation I needed from her. As 11 she spoke, I could detect an odor of an alcoholic beverage 12 emanating from her, noted that her speech was slurred and 13 that her eyes were bloodshot and glassy. When asked where 14 she was coming from, she stated that she was coming from a 15 friend's house. When asked how much she had to drink 16 tonight, Ms. Owens advised me that she had consumed two 17 drinks. 18 I then requested her to step from the 19 vehicle so that I could administer the standardized field 20 sobriety tests to her. She did comply with that request. 21 Even out of the vehicle, I could detect an odor of alcoholic 22 beverage emanating from her. I noted her to be wearing a tan 23 leather jacket, a pair of blue jeans and a pair of brown 24 heeled shoes. I then walked her into the Medical Arts 25 Building parking lot, which was a lighted, flat, lined, level 6 t 1 surface, where she would be requested to administer the 2 standardized field sobriety tests. 3 Q Then what happened? 4 A I then proceeded to administer the 5 standardized field sobriety test. On the walk and turn, 6 during the instruction stage, I noted that she could not keep 7 her balance and that she started the test too soon. During 8 the walking stage, I noted that she raised her arms as if to 9 balance both out and back. She took twelve steps on the way 10 back, rather than the nine prescribed by the test, and she 11 made an improper turn by spinning on the front foot. 12 During the one-leg stand test, I noted that 13 she swayed continuously during the entire thirty seconds. 14 She raised her arms as if to balance continuously during the 15 entire thirty seconds, and she put her foot down once between 16 zero to ten seconds and once between eleven to twenty-one 17 seconds. 18 Then upon the completion of the standardized 19 field sobriety tests, after showing all of those signs of 20 intoxication, I did place her under arrest at or about 0038, 21 or 12:38 a.m., and placed her in the rear of my patrol car. 22 Q Did you inform her what she was being placed 23 under arrest for? 24 A Yes, I did. 25 Q What was that? 7 I A Driving under the influence of alcohol. 2 Q Then you stated you placed her in your 3 patrol car? 4 A Yes, I did. 5 Q Then what happened? 6 A I then began transporting Ms. Owens to the 7 Harrisburg Hospital. While en route to the Harrisburg 8 Hospital, Ms. Owens managed to get out of the handcuffs and 9 threw them through the open plexiglas window on my patrol 10 car. I then advised her that if she did not sit back there, 11 I would be forced to pull over and rehandcuff her; and that 12 if she wanted to be treated like a lady, she should act like 13 one. I then transported her to the Harrisburg Hospital where 14 she would be requested to submit to a chemical test of her 15 blood. i 16 Q Then what happened? 17 A We arrived at the Harrisburg Hospital around 18 10 minutes till 1 that morning, or 12:50 a.m., and we 19 registered into the Harrisburg Hospital at or about 12:54 20 a.m. Upon completion of the registration process, we were 21 placed in the family room of the hospital to await the 22 arrival of the staff technologist to withdraw her blood. 23 Q Then what happened? 24 A At or about 0116 hours, Mr. Mallis, a staff 25 technologist at the Harrisburg Hospital, did come in to 8 1 withdraw blood from Ms. Owens. Ms. Owens had indicated to me 2 prior to Mr. Mallis' arrival that she was not going to submit 3 to a chemical test. Then at or about 0117 hours, or 1:17 4 a.m., I did read the O'Connell warnings to Ms. Owens from the 5 DL-26 form and presented it to her for her signature. 6 Q Let me back you up a few minutes. After the 7 staff technician arrived, what happened? 8 A Mr. Mallis came into the room. Since Ms. 9 Owens had advised me that she was not going to submit to a 10 chemical test, I believed that the possibility arose that she 11 was not going to provide a chemical test; therefore, that 12 triggered the O'Connell warnings to me. I removed the DL-26 13 form from my clipboard and filled her name into the top, her 14 driver's license information, and read her the O'Connell 15 warnings. 16 MR. KABUSK: May I approach the witness? 17 THE COURT: Certainly. 18 BY MR. KABUSK: 19 Q I'm going to show you a photocopy of the 20 DL-26. Would you ide ntify that? 21 A Yes. This is the DL-26 form that I filled 22 out on May 7th, 1999, for the accused, Lisa Owens. 23 Q You stated you read the DL-26 to her? 24 A Yes, I did. 25 THE COURT: Has that been marked as an 9 1 exhibit? 2 MR. KABUSK: I will have it marked. 3 Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1, please. 4 (Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1 was marked for 5 identification.) 6 BY MR. KABUSK: 7 Q Officer Cornelious, would you read aloud 8 what you read for the motorist that evening? 9 THE COURT: Has this item been marked, and, 10 if so, how? 11 MR. KABUSK: The front side has been marked 12 as Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1. 13 THE COURT: Okay. 14 BY MR. KABUSK: 15 Q Would you read aloud what you read to the 16 motorist? 17 MR. WAGNER: I'm willing to accept the 18 testimony if he says he read everything, 1, 2, 3, 4, A, B and 19 C. 20 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk, is that satisfactory 21 for your purposes? 22 MR. KABUSK: That is satisfactory. If I 23 could just have Officer Cornelious circle the section that he 24 read. 25 THE COURT: Sure. 10 1 MR. KABUSK: I would note that he circled 2 Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4, and 4 includes A, B and C; also, 3 right underneath there, I certify that I have read the above 4 warning to the motorist regarding the suspension of their 5 operating privilege and gave the motorist the opportunity to 6 submit to chemical testing. That is what he circled. I move 7 for the admission of Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1. 8 MR. WAGNER: No objection. 9 THE COURT: Commonwealth's Exhibit 1 is 10 admitted. 11 (Commonwealth's Exhibit No. 1 was admitted.) 12 BY MR. KABUSK: 13 Q Officer Cornelious, after you read the DL-26 14 to the motorist, what happened? 15 A I presented it to her for her signature. 16 Ms. Owens advised me that she was not doing anything without 17 her lawyer being present. I, then, from past experiences, 18 asked her specifically, ma'am, having these O'Connell 19 warnings in mind, will you submit to the chemical test? And 20 she responded something to the effect of, what are you, 21 fucking deaf? I told you I wasn't doing anything without my 22 lawyer present. At that time, I signed that she was refusing 23 to sign and treated it as a refusal. 24 Q Then what happened? 25 A Ms. Owens was then rehandcuffed, I was given 11 1 the refusal form from the hospital that they fill out on 2 their paperwork, and she was then transported to the West 3 Shore Booking Center for further processing. 4 MR. KABUSK: No further questions. 5 THE COURT: Mr. Wagner? 6 CROSS-EXAMINATION 7 BY MR. WAGNER: 8 Q Officer Cornelious, on Friday, May the 7th, 9 as this woman's vehicle was traveling northbound, I believe 10 you indicated it was in the left turn lane, is that correct? 11 A At some point, yes. 12 Q The point that she was in the left turn 13 lane, was that, in fact, a left turn lane? 14 A Into the Camp Hill Borough Park or into 15 North 21st Street? 16 Q Is it, in fact, a left-hand turn lane that 17 she was in? In other words, if someone wanted to make a 18 left-hand turn, was this the appropriate lane to be in to 19 make a left-hand turn? 20 A I need you to be more specific, Mr. Wagner. 21 There's actually -- it's separated there. 22 Q Let's talk about the left-hand turn lane 23 that she was in. Where does that lead if one makes the 24 left-hand turn from this left-hand turn lane? 25 A Where she originally entered the left turn 12 1 lane, it can only turn into the Camp Hill Christian Seibert 2 Borough Park. Then there's a concrete median strip that juts 3 out. If you are to continue straight in that left, turn lane, 4 you're going to jump the median strip. 5 Q So that if someone is in this left turn lane 6 to make a left-hand turn, it would take you into, I believe, 7 a park, did you say? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q If one recognizes in that left-hand turn 10 lane that it's not the park they want to go into, your 11 testimony is that if they don't stop or take some other 12 action they're going to hit a concrete medial strip? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Did she hit the concrete medial strip? 15 A No, she didn't. 16 Q Instead, she got back into the northbound 17 lane, is that correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Then after she got into the northbound lane 20 for a second time, she gets into a left-hand turn lane? 21 A Yes. 22 Q This second left-hand turn lane, if one 23 makes the left-hand turn, where does it go? 24 A North 21st Street. 25 Q Is it at this location that she stopped for 13 1 the red traffic signal? 2 A Yes, it is. 3 Q So, as I understand it, at this red traffic 4 signal, the light turned green, she hesitated, but then did 5 make the left-hand turn? 6 A Yes. 7 Q So, she made the appropriate left-hand turn 8 from the appropriate left-hand-turn lane? 9 A Yes, she did. 10 Q I note that in your affidavit of probable 11 cause that we've seen in the DUI case you did not mention at 12 all, did you, that as she made the left-hand turn onto 21st 13 Street that she did anything inappropriate on 21st 14 Street, did she? In other words, she didn't go across any 15 lines on 21st Street, did she? 16 A No, she didn't. 17 Q Now, can you tell me what part of the Motor 18 Vehicle Code is violated if someone makes a left-hand turn 19 from an appropriate left-hand turn lane when the light turns 20 areen but you hesitate for a little while? 21 MR. KABUSK: Object to the relevance of 22 that, Your Honor. 23 THE COURT: Mr. Wagner? 24 MR. WAGNER: It's probable cause to stop the 25 vehicle on arrest for DUI. 14 i 1 MR. KABUSK: We're at the refusal hearing. I P: 2 We're not at the DUI. Probable cause is riot at issue. 3 MR. WAGNER: We raised it in our motion we 4 filed. 5 THE COURT: I know you raised it, but is the 6 legality of the stop an issue in the license suspension case? 7 MR. WAGNER: I believe it is. I believe the 8 right to stop and the grounds to stop, to begin with, becomes 9 an issue. 10 MR. KABUSK: The law trays the legality of 11 the arrest is irrelevant. What'n at issue is reasonable + t 12 grounds of a police officer to stop. The Court says, under 4 13 the Dreisbach case, we're dealing here with the authority to i 14 request a person to submit, to a chemical test and not with 15 the admission of evidence of 1110 result of such a test. The i i 16 only valid inquiry in thin issue at a de novo hearing is i 17 whether, viewing the facts and the circumstances as they 18 appeared at the time, o reasonable person in the position of 19 the police officer could have concluded that the motorist was 20 operating the vehicle under the influence of alcohol. 21 THE COURT: What is the cite for that case? 22 MR. KABUSK: The Dreisbach case, 363 A.2d 23 870. That the legality of the arrest is irrelevant is the 24 Wysocki cage, 13313 A.2d 77. 25 THE COURT: Mr. Wagner, I'll permit you to 15 I ask the question for purposes of making a complete record. I 2 think Mr. Kabusk may be right, however. 3 MR. WAGNER: I understand what he's saying. 4 But the extension of that, the logical conclusion that he's 5 asking you to reach is any police officer can stop anybody. 6 If they happen to be drinking and they refuse to take the 7 test, their license is suspended. There must be a basis to 8 stop them to begin with, and that's what our position is. 9 THE COURT: You may ask the question. 10 MR. WAGNER: Thank you. 11 BY MR. WAGNER: 12 Q What provision of the Motor Vehicle Code is 13 violated if someone makes a left-hand turn from a left-hand 14 turn lane with a green light but hesitating a few minutes 15 before turning left? 16 A That, in and of itself, is not illegal. 17 Q I have a couple more questions, Officer. 18 Did you have some note pad with you that you were writing 19 down the times as each incident occurred? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Did you use that note pad, then, when you 22 filled out your affidavit of probable cause? 23 A Yes. 24 Q That note pad, as you filled it out, was at 25 the scene as things were happening? 16 1 A Yes. 2 Q So, it would have been as contemporaneously 3 with the incidents as reasonably possible? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Now, what you've told us in your affidavit 6 of probable cause is that this particular DL-26 was presented 7 and read to the Defendant at 1:17 in the morning. Is that 8 accurate? Is that what your affidavit of probable cause 9 says? 10 A Yes, when it was read. 11 Q In the top right-hand corner of the document 12 that's now submitted to the Court for its consideration there 13 is written the time of 1:18 refused. Did you write that 1:18 14 refused there? 15 A Yes, I did. 16 Q So, what you're telling us is within a 17 minute of the time that you've read this document to her she 18 refused to take the test? 19 A Yes. 20 Q When did you start filling out this 21 document? 22 A I started filling out the top prior to Mr. 23 Mallis' arrival, because she had already indicated she was 24 not going to submit to the test. 25 Q I believe you've indicated to the Court that 17 1 you read, and we've stipulated you read, 1, 2, 3, 4, A, B and 2 C, is that accurate? 3 A Yes. 4 Q And you did that at this 1:17 time frame? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Now, you signed this document, after you 7 read this, immediately, your name here, signature of Officer 8 Warren Scott Cornelious, dated 5/7/99? Did you, in fact, 9 sign your name and put that date right after you read that 10 information to her? 11 A Yes, I did. 12 Q Then you presented the document to her to 13 sign: 14 A Yes, I did. 15 Q She refused to sign and made some d erogatory 16 comments to you? 17 A Yes, she did. 18 Q Did you take the form back? 19 A The form never really left my hand. I 20 presented it with -- on the clipboard to her, so it was never 21 out of my hands. 22 Q Then after you presented it to her to sign 23 and she refused, you then signed your name a second time, 24 Warren Scott Cornelious, May 7, 1999? 25 A No. First I asked her, having the O'Connell 18 .__..__ _ __ _ _,_ 1 warnings in mind, ma'am, would you like to submit to this 2 test. 3 Q Then you gave it to her to sign? 4 A No. Then she told me, you know, I'm not -- 5 what she said earlier. Therefore, I took it -- then I signed 6 that she refused to sign. 7 Q When she made this comment to you, you took 8 it, I think you said, and you signed your name a second time 9 on there? 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q As soon as she refused to sign it, if you 12 will, you pulled it back from her and you signed it a second 13 time? 14 A Yes. 15 Q When you first placed her in the back of 16 your patrol car under arrest for DUI, did you give her her 17 Miranda warnings? 18 A No, I did not. 19 Q So, you're telling us that you didn't tell 20 her in the back of the patrol car anything about the right to 21 remain silent, the right to have an attorney or anything of 22 that nature? 23 A That's what I'm telling you. 24 Q Did she, in fact, when you placed her in the 25 patrol car, ask to talk to an attorney? 19 1 A I believe she did. 2 Q Did she persist, throughout the course of 3 the travel to the Harrisburg Hospital, from the back of your 4 car, the opportunity to talk with an attorney? 5 A I believe she did. 6 Q Did you provide that opportunity to her? 7 A No, I did not. 8 Q When you arrived at the hospital at 12:50 9 -- I believe you said you logged in about 12:50, is that 10 right? 11 A 12:54 is what's shown on the hospital 12 document. 13 Q From the point in time when you placed her 14 in the back of your car, which I believe was about 12:38 in 15 the morning, until the time that you registered at 12:54 in 16 the morning, some forty minutes later, despite her request to 17 talk with an attorney, that was denied to her? 18 A It was. 19 Q Even though her freedom, if you will, was 20 restrained at that point? 21 A Yes. 22 Q At what point, if any, was she permitted to 23 talk with a lawyer, if you know? 24 A She wasn't permitted to talk to an attorney 25 in my presence. 20 I Q Even though she asked for one? 2 A Yes. 3 MR. WAGNER: Thank you. I have no further 4 questions. 5 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk? 6 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 7 BY MR. KABUSK: 8 Q Officer Cornelious, you had stated that she 9 had indicated to you that she was not going to take the test. 10 What was the substance of that conversation, and when did 11 that occur, and what did she say? 12 A At some point en route to the hospital, 13 after asking for an attorney, Ms. Owens told me that a DUI 14 was a money maker for mothers Against Drunk Driving and she 15 was not going to submit to a chemical test because she 16 remembers what happened the last time she submitted to the 17 chemical test. 18 Q Is that what you're taking as her prior 19 indication that she would refuse the test? 20 A That and the fact that she did request to 21 speak with a lawyer. Once somebody indicates to me that 22 they're not going to submit to the test or says the word 23 lawyer, I automatically read them the DL-26 form. 24 MR. KABUSK: No further questions. 25 THE COURT: Mr. Wagner? 21 1 RECROSS -EXAMINATION 2 BY MR. WAGNER: 3 Q You confused me with the last comment. As 4 soon as someone says they want to talk to a lawyer, you read 5 them the DL-26 form, is that what you just told us? 6 A Yes, it is. 7 Q When she said in the back of the patrol car 8 at 12:30 in the morning, I want to talk to a lawyer, did you 9 read her the DL-26 form? 10 A No. That waits till the hospital. 11 Q Did you, in fact, give her the opportunity 12 to talk to a lawyer? 13 A No, I didn't. 14 Q You didn't tell her that she should stay 15 quiet because things that she says could be used against her, 16 did you? 17 A No, because that becomes spontaneous 18 utterances. 19 Q Then at that point in time, despite having 20 her under arrest, her saying she wanted a lawyer, you used 21 her comments in the back of that patrol car about Mothers 22 Against Drunk Driving and I remember the last time to support 23 what you did here today to conclude it was a refusal, didn't 24 you? 25 A Yes. 22 1 Q I believe you said never, in your presence, 2 was this woman advised that s he had the right to remain 3 silent and anything s he said could be used against her? 4 A Not in my pr esence. 5' Q Yet you sit here today using what she said 6 to you after she was placed u nder arrest against her, aren't 7 you? 8 A Yes, because I didn't ask her any questions 9 at that point. 10 MR. WAGNER: I have nothing further. 11 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk? 12 MR. KABUSK: Nothing further, Your Honor. 13 THE COURT: You may step down. Thank you. 14 Does that conclude the Commonwealth's case-in-chief? 15 MR. KABUSK: It does, Your Honor. 16 THE COURT: Mr. Wagner? 17 MR. WAGNER: I have nothing to present by 18 way of testimony, Your Honor. 19 THE COURT: Did counsel wish to make closing 20 arguments? 21 MR. WAGNER: If the Court is going to make a 22 decision today, yes. If not, I would ask for a couple of 23 days to give just a letter of memorandum in support of our 24 position. 25 THE COURT: I don't think I need memoranda. 23 1 I would be happy to hear closing arguments. If counsel 2 insist upon submitting briefs, of course, I wouldn't refuse 3 them. 4 MR. WAGNER: Our point today is we do 5 believe that there is some minimal requisite that the police 6 officer have the authority to stop a vehicle before 7 everything else comes in to play. The question is, what is 8 that minimum authority to stop this vehicle? What was the 9 motor vehicle violation? We don't have a speedometer check 10 here to say whether the 51 in a 35 was appropriate. We've 11 heard that the left-hand turn was appropriately done. What 12 is that minimum amount that she did to place her in a 13 position that the officer has the right to confront her to 14 begin with? Issue No. 1. 15 More importantly, issue No. 2, this woman is 16 placed under arrest. And, yes, we understand this is a civil 17 proceeding. But the basis upon which this officer concluded 18 that she was going to refuse this test were comments that she 19 made to him in the back of the patrol car after she 20 repeatedly asked to talk to a lawyer and after a period of 21 time where he chose not to give her her rights to remain 22 silent. Then he comes into court and honestly says to you, 23 sure, I'm using those to support my position; i.e., the 24 totality of the events support a refusal. 25 But when we focus in on a one-minute time 24 I frame, what PennDOT is asking this Court to conclude is that 2 at 1:17 I read this piece of paper, I signed it, I handed it 3 to her, and she said she refused to sign it. I took it back, 4 and then I signed it. That's what he told you. But what he 5 did not tell you is, the bottom of this exhibit, the refusal 6 to sign this form is not a refusal to submit to the chemical 7 test. You must still give the motorist an opportunity to 8 take the chemical test after reviewing this form. What he 9 said was, I asked her to sign. She refused. There wasn't 10 any indication that she was given this form to review, then 11 asked again to take the test. The fact that he read the form 12 is okay. The fact that he asked her to sign may be okay. 13 But, clearly, you have not heard this officer say, I gave her 14 this form with the opportunity to review it. He gave it to 15 her to sign it. As a result of that, we submit that the 16 refusal is not grounds to suspend the license. 17 THE COURT: Mr. Kabusk? 18 MR. KABUSK: Yes, Your Honor. Once again, I 19 would bring up that this is a civil matter. The Implied 20 Consent Law remains one of the Commonwealth's most effective 21 tools against drunk driving, providing effective means of 22 quickly denying intoxicated motorists the use of 23 Commonwealth's highways. It also facilitates the acquisition 24 of chemical analysis and permits this information to be 25 utilized in legal proceedings. That is from the Occhibone 25 1 case at 669 A.2d 326. 2 Regarding the reasonable grounds issue, I've 3 already addressed that. The legality of the stop is 4 irrelevant. What's at issue is reasonable grounds. In 5 viewing the facts and circumstances as they appeared at the 6 time, could a reasonable person in the position of the police 7 officer have concluded the motorist was operating the vehicle 8 under the influence of alcohol? I would just request that 9 you review the facts as they are. There was testimony that 10 she was speeding; that she was weaving; that when she pulled 11 over -- that she pulled away from the officer after she was 12 pulled over; then, of course, all the indicators of alcohol. 13 Regarding the refusal, anything less than an 14 unqualified, unequivocal assent constitutes a refusal. That 15 would be the Ingram case at 648 A.2d 285. The Courts have 16 consistently held that any response substantially short of an 17 unqualified, unequivocal assent to submit to the test 18 constitutes a refusal. Once again, it's clear in this case, 19 I would submit, that there was a refusal. 20 Then regarding the O'Connell warning, the 21 case of Commonwealth v. Scott, 684 A.2d 539 states that once 22 the motorist was properly warned of the O'Connell warnings, 23 that is all the officer needs to do. 24 I would respectfully request that the appeal 25 be dismissed and the suspension reinstated. 26 1 THE COURT: We'll take a five-minute recess, 2 and then 2 will enter an Order. 3 (A brief recess was taken.) 4 THE COURT: We'll enter this Order: 5 "AND NOW, this 2nd day of September, 1999, 6 upon consideration of Petitioner's appeal from license 7 suspension, and following a hearing held on this date, the 8 appeal is denied, and the license suspension based upon a 9 chemical test refusal is affirmed." 10 THE COURT: So, that's the Order, and court 11 is adjourned. 12 (Court was adjourned.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 27 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. C ?l A-C ` Susan Rice Stoner Official Stenographer The foregoing record of the proceedings on the hearing of the within matter is hereby approved and directed to be filed. Date 28 \vm-,A IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA DCO Y Y NOTICE OF DOCKETING APPEAL Iv Docket No: 2589 C.D. 1999 Filed Date: 10/04/99 Re: LISA A OWENS v BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING Lower Court No.: 99-3859 A Notice of Appeal, a copy of which is enclosed, from an order of your court has been docketed in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. The docket number in the Commonwealth Court is endorsed on this notice. The Commonwealth Court docket number must be on all correspondence and documents filed with the Court. Under Chapter 19 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Notice of Appeal has the effect of directing the Court to transmit the certified record in the matter to the Prothonotary of the Commonwealth Court. `J The complete record, including the opinion of the trial judge, should be forwarded to the Commonwealth Court within forty (40) days of the date of filing of the Notice of Appeal. Do not transmit a partial record. Pa. R.A.P. 1921 to 1933 provides the standards for preparation, certification and transmission of the record. The address to which the Court is to transmit the record is set forth on page 2 of this notice. NOTICE TO COUNSEL A copy of this notice is being sent to all parties or counsel indicated on the proof of service accompanying the Notice of Appeal. The appearance of all counsel has been entered on the record in the Commonwealth Court. Counsel has thirty (30) days from the date of filing of the Notice of Appeal to file a praecipe to withdraw their appearance pursuant to Pa. R.A.P. 907(b). Appellant or Appellant's attorney should review the record of the trial court, in order to insure that it is complete, prior to certification to this Court. (Note: A copy of the zoning Ordinance must accompany records in Zoning Appeal cases). The addresses to which you are to transmit documents to this Court are set forth on Page 2 of this Notice. If you have special needs, please contact this court in writing as soon as possible. Lower Court Judge: Honorable J. Wesley Oler Jr. Attorney: P. Richard Wagner Attorney: George Kabusk Attorney: Harold H. Cramer Notices Exit: 10/08/99 Prothonotary LISA A. OWENS V. Petitioner, COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Respondent. IN THE COURT OF CO MMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNgLVMIA. ? NO. 99-3859 z; CIVIL ACTION - LAW LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEL Lx NOTICE OF APPEAL as IIIp NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Petitioner, LISA A. OWENS, hereby appeals to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania from the Order of Court entered in this matter on September 2, 1999. This Order has been entered in the docket as evidenced by the attached copy of the docket entries. Respectfully submitted, MANCKE,,WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY DATE: By / P. Ri and Wagner, Esqu I.D. ,#23103 223 North-Front Street HarrisSurg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 Attorneys for Petitioner TRUE COPY FROM RECORD tC Y..":'i!.li:.•,.,? ?qr.:,,. ? ?;•::• •,T;`a S 'rr.yhard TtlV/ l 0-1!16' 1 Z) p J LISA A. OWENS IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Petitioner, j v. NO. 99-3859 CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL Respondent. NOTICE OF APPEAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Petitioner, LISA A. OWENS, hereby appeals to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania from the Order of Court entered in this matter on September 2, 1999. This Order has been entered in the docket as evidenced by the attached copy of the docket entries. Respectfully submitted, MANCKE,;WA NEG R, HERSHEY & TULLY B ?.Y P. R and Wagner,- Esqu re I.D. ,023103 223 North Front Street Harr s urg, PA 17110 (717) 234-7051 Attorneys for Petitioner DATE: LO f/! LISA A. OWENS, Petitioner V. COMMONWEALTH OF PA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION - LAW 99-3859 CIVIL TERM LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL A NOTICE OF APPEAL having been filed in this matter, the official court reporter is hereby ordered to produce, certify and file the transcript in this matter in conformity with Rule 1922 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure. Date: D y 9 9 Respectfully Submitted, MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY Attorneys for Peu 'over 2233 , ;burg, PA 17110 234-7051 LISA A. OWENS, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS . CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Petitioner, V. NO. 99-3859 CIVIL ACTION - LAW COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL Respondent. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Debra K. Spinner, Secretary in the law firm of MANCKE AND WAGNER, do hereby certify that I am this day serving a copy of the foregoing document to the following persons and in the manner indicated below, which service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing same in the United States Mail, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with first class postage, prepaid, and addressed as follows: The Honorable J. Wesley Oler Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA 17013 George Kabusk, Esquire Office of Chief Counsel PA Department of Transportation 1101 South Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17104 Court Reporter Cumberland County Courthouse Carlisle, PA 17/01,3. By CUI U?J 7? ??2liltq?tJ Debra K. Spinner/ Secretary MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY 2233 North Front Street Harrisburg, PA 17110 P. Richard Wagner, Esquire DATE: /O/ Attorney for Petitioner y/?Jf/ PYS510 Cumberland County Prothonotary 's Office Page 1 Civil Case Inquiry 1999-03859 OWENS LISA A, (vs) PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF Reference No..: Case Type.....: APPEAL - LICENSE SUSP Filed........: Time 6/25/1999 Judgment. .. : .00 Judge Assigned: .........: Execution Date 8:03 0/00/0000 Disposed Desc.: ------------ Case Comments ------------- Jury Trial.... Disposed Date. 0/00/0000 Higher Crt 1.: Higher Crt 2.: General Index Attorney Info OWENS LISA A APPELLANT WAGNER P RICHARD 5 ALTOONA AVENUE ENOLA PA 17025 PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF APPELLEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING P 0 BOX 68693 HARRISBURG PA 17123 * Date Entries ******************************************************************************** 6/25/1999 APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF DRIVERSELICENSE ------------------------------------------------------------------- 6/30/1999 ORDER - DATED 6/29/99 - IN RE LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL - HEARING 9/2/99 - 2:30 PM CR 1 - BY J WESLEY OLER JR J - NOTICE MAILED 6/30/99 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 9/08/1999 ORDER OF COURT - DATED 09-02-99 - LICENSE SUSPENSION BASED UPON A CHEMICAL TEST REFUSAL IS AFFIRMED - BY THE COURT OLER J - COPIES MAILED 09-08-99 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LAST ENTRY - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ******************************************************************************** * Escrow Information * Fees & Debits Be Bal P mts/Ad' End Bat APPEAL LIC SUSP 35.00 35.00 .00 TAX ON APPEAL .50 .50 .00 SETTLEMENT 5.00 5.00 .00 JCP FEE 5.00 5.00 .00 ------------------------ ------------ 45.50 45.50 .00 * End of Case Information TF" C';OPY Fpy REOCAD ? wl?ersot, hn urno M MY low of Wk r rn fty, r r -? 0 co J ? G ¢> J Z . q a?g'j?a 3 L w L) (D Z Q w 2 _ WE 00 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN 18 A TRUE AND COR• „enm:xurtril6 rb'riZ i RECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL .nw nuicr.; [rFtaeiox exrox1. m lu FlI.Ep IN TNIB ACTION wlrxm rwexir pal oAl$ 1x0„ BY MANCKE, WAGNER, HERSHEY & TULLY FiR,KE ATTORNEY xcwar . ?exr ,urrtHRR[P a ".$,ro Uoa A AT~ IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA LISA A. OWENS, Appellant V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING No. 2589 C.D. 1999 NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE This is to notify you that the above-captioned matter has been withdrawn discontinued and ended. DATE: October 29, 1999 TRIAL COURT NO: 99-3859 CtRi iriED FR&i 1 nE REG11-0-1 AND ORDI_R EXIT nc-+ 2 1999 ell DEPUTY PROTHON TARY CHIEF LERK Chit'" D"', w nn u :L C.