The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About03-3543JESSE D. KRATZER Petitioner COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING Respondent : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL (FROM : IMPOSITION OF THE INTERLOCK : REQUIREMENT AND THE IMPOSITION OF : AN ADDITIONAL YEAR OF SUSPENSION : FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY) LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL AND NOW, comes Petitioner, Jesse D. Kmtzer, by and through his attorneys, Mancke, Wagner & Spmha, and makes the following averments in support of this License Suspension Appeal: 1. Petitioner, Jesse D. Kratzer, is a Pennsylvania licensed ddver with a residence address of 265 Acorn Court, Mechanicsburg, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. 2. Respondent, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing, has a mailing address at Riverfront Office Center, Third Floor, 1101 South Front Street, Harrisburg, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania 17104-2516. 3. Petitioner received a notice of license suspension by way of letter dated July 2, 2003 from the Department of Transportation indicating, in pertinent part, "Before your driving p#vilege can be restored you are required by law to have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege will remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before your eligibility date.' Said notice is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. 4. The above-mentioned provision, as part of the Department's notice of July 2, 2003, is illegal, invalid, and improper for masons which include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) At the time of Petitioner's sentencing in Cumberland County, the tdal court did not order that each motor vehicle owned by the Petitioner be equipped with an approved ignition interlock system and Penn Dot has no authority to order the ignition interlock or to extend the license suspension for an additional year. See Schneider v. Penn Dot, 790 A.2d 363 (Pa,Cmwith. 2002). (b) The provisions of Act 63 of 2000 are unconstitutional in that the Act violates Article II1, {}1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution which provides, in pertinent part: "no law shall be passed except by Bill and no Bill shall be so altered or amended on its passage through either House as to change ifs odginalpurpose.' Const. Art. III, {}1. (c) The provisions of Act 63 violate the Pennsylvania Constitution because no Bill shall be passed containing more than one subject by including provisions for restitution for identity theft along with ignition interlock requirements. Const. Art. III, {}3. (d) The provisions of Act 63 are unconstitutional in that it violates Article III, {}4 of the Pennsylvania Constitution which provides, in pertinent part: "Eveq/ Bill shall be considered on three different days in each House...' Const. Art. III, {}4. (e) The provisions of Act 63 violate Petitioner's equal protection and due process dghts under the State and Federal Constitutions by treating similarly situated persons differently without a rational basis. Said unequal enforcement of the law is not ratbnally related to the protection of the public from intoxicated drivers. (f) The provisions of Act 63 violate the Separation of Powers Doctdne and procedural due process as the interlock requirement is not analogous to the imposition of costs in a criminal proceeding, is not administrative in nature and interferes with the sentencing power of the court as it requires the court to certify to the executive branch (Penn Dot) whether 2 the ignition interlock systems have been installed before Penn Dot will reinstate the operating privilege which necessarily requires the court to investigate whether or not the devices have been installed without procedural due process. See Commonwealth v. Mockaitis, 54 D&C 4~ 155 (Cumb. 2001). (g) The provisions of Act 63 violate due process because Penn Dot has no authority or jurisdiction over vehicles owned by a motorist but not registered and not operated on a public highway. (h) The provisions of Act 63 violate due process because the statute is vague in failing to define ownership and is overbroad because, by its reach, it punishes constitutionally protected activity, i.e. ownership of a non-registered vehicle maintained and/or used solely on private property in violation of Petitioner's rights under Article, I, {}9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and the 5t~ Amendment of the Unites States Constitution. (i) Penn Dot has waived any perceived authorization to have the ignition interlock requirements and/or extend the license suspension by its failure to file an appeal, within 30 days of notice of the court's failure to impose such requirements on the Petitioner. (j) The application of the statute gives improper retroactive action against the Petitioner effecting substantive rights. (k) The law (Act 63) is inapplicable to the defendant as the previous violation(s) pre-dated the Act and/or would illegally and/or unconstitutionally result in ex post facto violation and/or improper retroactive application of the law. (I) Act 63 is inapplicable to the facts of this case. 5. Petitioner requests the court take judicial notice of Senate Bill 849 and all of its prior forms prior to becoming Act 63 of 2000 including the legislative summary obtained from the Pennsylvania State website, 3 www.legis.state.pa.us, in chronological order beginning with the summary and ~rinter numbers 952, 1225, 1814, 1918, 2038, and 2059. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that this Court declare that the portion of the Department's notice of July 2, 2003 which reads: "Before your driving privilege can be restored you are required by law fo have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. ff you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege will remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before your eligibility date" be declared illegal, unconstitutional, and stricken as part of the Department's notice and direct that the Department reinstate the Petitioner's driving privileges after the one (1) year suspension for the conviction for driving under the influence, subject to the payment of the restoration fee and providing proof of insurance. Dated: Res"~f~ submitted, John E Mancke, Esq., ID No. 07212 Manck~. Wagner & Spreha 2233 N. ~:mnt Street, Harrisburg, PA 17110 717-234-7051, Attorney for Petitioner 4 VERIFICATION I hereby vedfy that the statements made in this document are tie and correct. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unswom falsification to authorities. Date 5 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Bureau of Driver Licensing Mail Date= JULY 02, 2005 JESSE D KRATZER 265 ACORN CT MECHANICSBURG PA 17055 WID ~ 031766117031769 001 PROCESSING DATE 06/25/2003 DRIVER LICENSE # 26408835 DATE OF BIRTH 04/30/1983 LICENSE IN BUREAU Dear MR. KRATZER: This is an Of~lctal Not/ce o~ the suspension of your Driving Privilege as authorized by Section I552B of the Pennsyivania Vehicle Code. As a result of your 0q/29/2005 conviction of violating Section $731 of the Vehicle Code DRIVING UNDER INFLUENCE on 05/19/2002= Your driving privilege is SUSPENDED fop a pep/od YEAR(S) e~fectlve 11/06/2004 at 12:01 a.m. WARNING: If you are convicted of driving while your license is suspended/revoked the penalties will be a MINIMUM of 90 days imprisonment AND a $1,000 fine AND your driving privilege will be suspended/revoked for a MINIMUM 1 year period This suspension is in addition to any other suspensions already on your record. wish to contact your after your release to notified. PRISON RELEASE REQUIREMENT (ACT151) The Court of CUMBERLAND CTY, Court Number 1582, Court Term 2002 has sentenced you to serve a pr/son term for this violation. Pursuant to Section lSfil(a.1) of the Vehicle Code, you will not receive credit for this suspension/revocation or any additional suspension/revocation until you complete your prison term. The Court must certify your completion to PennDOT. You may probation officer and/or the Court make sure that PennDOT is properly EXHIBIT - 05176&1170~1769 IGNITION INTERLOCK Before your driving privilege can be restored you ape required by law to have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence. If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege wil! remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before Your eligibility date. PROVIDING PROOF OF INSURANCE Within the last 30 days of your suspension/revocation, we will send you a letter asking that you provide proof of insurance at that time. This letter w/Il list acceptabie documents and what will be needed if you do not own a vehicle registered in Pennsyivania· Important: Please make sure that PennDOT is notified if you move from your current address. You may nat/fy PennDOT of your address change by coiling any of the phone numbers listed at the end af this letter. APPEAL You have the right to appeal this action to the Court of Common Pleas (Civil Division) within 30 days of the mail date, JULY 02, 2003, of this letter. Z~ You ~tle an appeal in the County court, the Court w111 glve you a time-stamped certified copy of the appeal. In order for your appeal to be valid, you must send this t/me-stamped certified copy of the appeal by certified mail to: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Off/ce of Chief Counsel Third Floor, Riverfrant Office Center Harrisburg, PA 1710~-2516 Remember, this is an OFFICIAL NOTICE OF SUSPENSION. Sincereiy, Rebecca L. Bickley, Dlrector Bureau of Driver Licensing 051766117051749 INFORMATION 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. IN STATE 1-800-932-~600 TDD IN STATE OUT-OF-STATE 717-591-6190 TDD OUT-OF-STATE WEB SITE ADDRESS www.dot.state.pa.us 1-800-228-0676 717-391-6191 JESSE D. KRATZER Petitioner COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING Respondent : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL (FROM : IMPOSITION OF THE INTERLOCK : REQUIREMENTAND THE IMPOSITION OF : AN ADDITIONAL YEAR OF SUSPENSION : FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY) AND NOW, this ? day of ~~_, 2003, upon Petition of Jesse D. Kratzer, a beadng is set on the License Suspension Appeal for the ~ day of~ . ,2003 at -~,o.m. fn Courtroom No. __~ , Cumberland County Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania.' Notice of said headng shall be given by Petitioner's counsel to the Department of Transportation at least sixty (60) days prior to the date of said hearing. BY THE COURT: Distribution: __ P,~ honotary's Office ~ //umce of Chief Counsel, PA DePartment of Transportation 1101 S. Front St., Harrisburg, PA 17104.2516 John B Mancke, Esquire . 233 N. Front St., Hanisburg, PA 17110 JESSE D. KRATZER, Petitioner COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent JESSE D. KRATZER, Petitioner ro COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, Respondent IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-3542 CIVIL TERM LICENSE REVOCATION APPEAL (FROM IMPOSITION OF THE INTERLOCK REQUIREMENT AND IMPOSITION OF AN ADDITIONAL YEAR OF SUSPENSION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA :~S43 CIVIL TERM ~ICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL (FROM IMPOSITION OF THE INTERLOCK REQUIREMENT AND THE IMPOSITION OF AN ADDITIONAL YEAR OF SUSPENSION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY) IN RE: LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL/LICENSE REVOCATION APPEAL ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this 3rd day of October, 2003, this matter having been called for hearing, on agreement of the parties, the appeal of the petitioner from the revocation of his driver's license and from the suspension of his driver's license is sustained in part and denied in part. Specifically, that portion of the license revocation and license suspension requiring the installation of the ignition interlock system prior to the restoration of driving privileges is stricken. The balance of the appeals are denied. ~ By the Court, ~eorge Kabusk, Esquire ~ ~O~B. Mancke ' Office of Chief Counsel ~o~ ~- _- , Esquire =zoo Nor5n Front Street PA Department of Transportation Harrisburg, PA 17110 1101 S. Front Street For the Respondent Harrisburg, PA 17104-2516 For the Petitioner :mae