HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-3832Ralph S. Garretson,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION,
BUREAU OF DRlVER LICENSING,
Appellee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.:
LICENSE SUSPENSION
APPEAL
PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM IMPOSITION OF
IGNITION INTERLOCK REQUIREMENTS AND
APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF OPERATOR'S PRIVILEGE
AND NOW comes the Appellant, RALPH S. GARRETSON, by and through his
attorneys, The Law Offices of Paul Bradford Orr, respectfully avers the following:
1. Appellant resides at 523 Bosler Avenue, Lemoyne, Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania 17043.
2. By letter or notice dated July 10, 2002, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit A,
the Department of Transportation suspended Appellant's operating privileges (Operator's
License No. 17010250) for a period of one (1) year, effective June 18, 2002 at 12:01 a.m. as a
result of his conviction for DUI and sua sponte imposed ignition interlock requirements.
3. Imposition of ignition interlock requirements is unlawful in that it was done by
PennDOT without legal authority and in the absence of imposition of those requirements by this
Court.
4. Petitioner has the right to appeal to this Honorable Court by way of this Court's
jurisdiction found in 42 Pa. C.S. § 933 (a)(1)(ii).
5. Said suspension arises out of the Petitioner's alleged conviction of Section 3731
of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, Driving Under the Influence.
6. Said suspension is unconstitutional in that it violates due process and equal
protection under both the Pennsylvania and United States Constitutions.
7. Said suspension is contrary to law.
8. Said suspension should be automatically stayed upon the filing of this Petition,
and upon timely notice to the Department of Transportation.
WHEREFORE, your Petitioner respectfully requests that this matter be set down for a
hearing and in the interim, the imposition of interlock requirements imposed on Appellant by
PennDOT be set aside, and enter a stay of the suspension of Petitioner's operating privileges
pending this appeal.
Date:
pe 1 su ' :
1~ tul Bradforff'Or~, Esqu'
50 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Telephone (717) 258-8558
Supreme Court I.D. No. 71786
Ralph S. Garretson,
Appellant
V.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION,
BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING,
Appellee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
NO.:
LICENSE SUSPENSION
APPEAL
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of Petitioner's PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM
IMPOSITION OF IGNITION INTERLOCK REQUIREMENTS AND APPEAL FROM
SUSPENSION OF OPERATOR'S PRIVILEGE was served Certified Mail upon the
following:
Date:
PA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND LICENSING
OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL
THIRD FLOOR, RIVERFRONT OFFICE CENTER
HARRISBURG, PA 17104
tRTATIOi
Iriver. L$censing:i'
~-ettee
tO~e
~P1V-
lumber Oq
thefl
~rng.:~nstruct
~c~(s)'~..~
this requ~
hat'PennDOT
~. YOu may
I~¥ of
letter,
~h
~n~
vehicle
his letter,
Court of
the
order
of
'~CE O; SU~
Rebecca Lo
Bureau of Dr
¥, D~rectar
=ens~ng
DD
,state.pa.us
Ralph. Garretson,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, :
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT :
OF TRANSPORTATION, :
BUREAU OF DRIVER LICENSING, :
Appellee :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
LICENSE SUSPENSION
APPEAL
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this ~'/b~ day of. ~. ,, C,.~u ~'-(- 2002, upon consideration of
this APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF OPERATOR'S PRIVILEGE, it is hereby Ordered that a
Hearing on the matter shall be held on _ ff,..K,tt~ day of~ 2002, at
q :3t0 o'clock /~. M. in Courtroom No. / of the Cumberland County
Courthouse.
A Supersedeas is granted pursuant to Vehicle Code Section 1550 (b) (1) until such time that this
Honorable Court resolves this appeal.
Distribution:
BY THE COURT:
.,,"PA Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles and Licensing, Office of Chief Counsel,
Third Floor, Riverfront Office Center, Harrisburg, PA 17104
-~Law Offices of Paul Bradford Orr, 50 E. High Street, Carlisle, PA 17013
RALPH GARRETSON,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA,
PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION,
BUREAU OF DRIVER
LICENSING,
Appellee
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
02-3832 CIVIL TERM
LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL
IN RE: TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
Proceedings held before the HONORABLE
J. WESLEY OLER, JR., J., Cumberland County
Courthouse, Carlisle, Pennsylvania, on
Monday, November 25, 2002, in Courtroom
Number One.
APPEARANCES:
Paul B. Orr, Esquire
For the Appellant
George Kabusk, Esquire
For the Appellee
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
THE COURT: This is t~Le time and place for
a hearing on a Petition for Appeal frc, m Imposition of
Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension
of Operator's Privilege. We will let the record indicate
that the Appellant/Petitioner, Ralph S. Garretson, is
present in court with his counsel, Paul B. Orr, Esquire.
The Commonwealth is represented today by George Kabusk,
Esquire.
The Court has met in chambers with counsel,
and understands that to the extent that the title of the
petition may have indicated that this was an appeal from
the one year suspension provided for in the notice from the
Commonwealth, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
dated July 10, 2002, that is not correct, and, in fact, the
appeal is simply from the interlock aspect of the order.
Is that correct, Mr. Orr?
MR. ORR: That's correct, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And for that reason am I to
enter an order dismissing the appeal to the extent that it
relates to the one year suspension?
MR. ORR: We don't have any problem with
that.
THE COURT: All right. And is that what
you are requesting, Mr. Kabusk?
MR. KABUSK:
Yes, Your Honor.
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
initial order:
THE COURT: Ail right. We'll enter this
AND NOW, this 25th day .Df November, 2002,
upon consideration of Appellant's Peti~ion for Appeal from
Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal
from Suspension of Operator's Privilege, and to the extent
that the petition may imply an appeal from the initial
one-year suspension provided for in the notice from the
Appellee, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,. Department of
Transportation, dated July 10, 2002 which was not intended
by Appellant), that aspect of the appeal is dismissed, and
the action of the Department in suspending Appellant's
driving privilege for a period of 1 year is affirmed.
Nothing in this order is intended to address
the aspect of Appellant's appeal relating to the ignition
interlock requirement contained in the said notice.
(End of order.)
THE COURT: Is that order satisfactory to
both counsel?
MR. KABUSK:
MR. ORR:
THE COURT:
MR. KABUSK:
Yes, Your Honor.
Yes, Your Honor.
All right. Mr. Kabusk.
Yes, Your Honor. What's been
marked as Commonwealth Exhibit Number 1 is actually a
document that's under seal and certification. I've
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
provided a copy to Mr. Orr.
Subexhibit Number 1 is Official Notice of
Suspension dated and mailed 7/10/02. That informs Mr.
Garretson of the one year suspension as a result of his
5/14/2002 conviction of violating Section 3731 of the
Vehicle Code on 11/21/2001. Additionally, that notice
informs him of the requirement for the ignition interlock.
Subexhibit 2 is a Report of Clerk of Courts
of Cumberland County, convicted 5/14/02, seal attached to
the original. On that you will note the date of
conviction for the violation of DUI, and I would draw the
Court's attention to block G, Act 63 i~nition interlock
required, and box no has been checked.
And Subexhibit 3 is the driving record which
appears in the file of the Defendant, Ralph Steven
Garretson, operator's number 17010250, date of birth
8/26/54, in the Bureau of Driver Licensing, Harrisburg
Pennsylvania. I move for the admission of what's been
marked Commonwealth Exhibit Number 1.
MR. ORR:
THE COURT:
Exhibit 1 is admitted.
was admitted.)
No objection, Your Honor.
Ail right. Commonwealth's
(Whereupon, Commonwealth.s Exhibit Number 1
MR. KABUSK: And that is the Department's
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
case, and Your Honor is aware of the Schneider case at
790 A.2d 363.
THE COURT: All right. Mr. Orr, do you
have a copy of whatever sentencing order applies to this
case?
MR. ORR: Your Honor, I normally -- I do
not have a copy of the sentencing order contained within
Mr. Garretson's file. I would concur with Subexhibit 2
that the Commonwealth has already addressed the Court to
that shows that that was not made a part of the requirement
of the sentencing court.
THE COURT: I think we should take a recess
and make a copy of that order a part of the record.
Otherwise I don't really have anything to refer to in the
opinion that relates directly to the order. So we'll take
a brief recess.
(Whereupon, a recess was taken at 9:42 a.m.)
(Whereupon, Petitioner's Exhibit No. 1 was
marked for identification.)
(Whereupon, court resumed at 9:50 a.m.)
AFTER RECESS
THE COURT: Mr. Orr.
MR. ORR: Yes, Your Honor. We have provided
the Court now with a certified copy of the original
sentencing order. We would ask to have that marked as
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
Petitioner's Exhibit A.
THE COURT: Petitioner,s Exhibit 1.
Kabusk, do you have any objection to the admission of
Petitioner's Exhibit 17
MR. KABUSK: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Petitioner's
Exhibit 1 is admitted.
admitted.)
Mr.
(Whereupon, Petitioner,s Exhibit No. 1 was
THE COURT: Is there any other evidence that
No, Your Honor.
No, Your ~[onor.
We'll enter' this order:
AND NOW, this 25th day of November, 2002,
upon consideration of Appellant's Petition for Appeal from
Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal
from Suspension of Operator's Privilege as the appeal
relates to the ignition interlock requirements, and
following a hearing, the record is declared closed, and the
matter is taken under advisement.
(End of order.)
THE COURT: Thank you very much. Court is
adjourned.
(Whereupon, the proceedings concluded at 9:52 a.m.)
MR. ORR:
MR. KABUSK:
THE COURT:
counsel wish to present at this hearing?
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that tlhe 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.
Official Court5 Reporter
The foregoing record of the proceedings on
the hearing of the within matter is hereby approved and
directed to be filed.
Date
nth Judicial District
RALPH GARRETSON,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA,
pENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION,
BUREAU OF DRIVER
LICENSING,
Appellee
IN THE COURT (DF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, pENNSYLVANIA
02-3832 CIVIL TERM
LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL
IN RE: APPEAL OF IGNITION INTERLOCK REQUIREMENTS
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 25th day of November, 2002, upon
consideration of Appellant's Petition for Appeal from Imposition
of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension of
Operator's Privilege as the appeal relates to the ignition
interlock requirements, and following a hearing, the record is
declared closed, and the matter is taken under advisement.
By the Court,
Paul B. Orr, Esquire
For the Appellant
George Kabusk, Esquire
For the Appellee
J~ Wes y ~ _~[3~7r, ·
:mae
RALPH GARRETSON, :
Appellant :
:
COMMONWEALTH OF :
PENNSYLVANIA, :
PENNSYLVANIA :
DEPARTMENT OF :
TRANSPORTATION, :
BUREAU OF DRIVER :
LICENSING, :
Appellee :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
02-3832 CIVIL TERM
LICENSE SUSPENSION APPEAL
IN RE: APPEAL OF ONE YEAR SUSPENSION
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 25th day of November, 2002, upon
consideration of Appellant's Petition for Appeal from Imposition
of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension of
Operator,s Privilege, and to the extent that the petition may
imply an appeal from the initial one-year suspension provided
for in the notice from the Appellee, Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, dated July 10, 2002
(which was not intended by Appellant), that aspect of the appeal
is dismissed, and the action of the Depart]ment in suspending
Appellant,s driving privilege for a period of 1 year is
affirmed.
Nothing in this order is intended to address the
aspect of Appellant's. appeal relating to the ignition interlock
requirement contained in the said notice.
Paul B. Orr, Esquire
For the Appellant
George Kabusk, Esquire
For the Appellee
By the Court,
./~es±ey Ol~r~/, Jr.,
· - m~e
RALPH GARRETSON,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF :
PENNSYLVANIA, :
DEPARTMENT OF :
TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU:
OF DRIVER LICENSING, :
Appellee :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 02-3832 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM IMPOSITION OF IGNITION
INTERLOCK REQUIREMENTS AND APPEAL ])'ROM SUSPENSION OF
OPERATING PRIVILEGE
BEFORE OLER, J.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2002, upon consideration of Appellant's
Petition from Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension
of Operator's Privilege, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying opinion, the
appeal is sustained to the extent that the portion of the Department of Transportation's
July 10, 2002, notice requiring Appellant to equip his vehicles with ignition interlock
systems, as a prerequisite to scheduled restoration of his ch:iving privilege, is rescinded.*
,,/George Kabusk, Esq.
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
1101 South Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17104-2516
Attorney for Appellee
BY THE COURT,
~ )4 /f
Wesley Ql~3r), Jr., J. c~ '
^
* By separate Order of Court, the appeal was dismissed to the extent that it implied a challenge to
the initial one-year suspension contained in the notice.
/ Paul Bradford Orr, Esq.
Law Offices of Paul Bradford Orr
50 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Attomey for Appellant
RALPH GARRETSON,
Appellant
COMMONWEALTH OF :
PENNSYLVANIA, :
DEPARTMENT OF :
TRANSPORTATION, BUREAU:
OF DRIVER LICENSING, :
Appellee :
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLANT) COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
NO. 02-3832 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: PETITION FOR APPEAL FROM IMPOSITION OF IGNITION
INTERLOCK REQUIREMENTS AND APPEAL FROM SUSPENSION OF
OPERATING PRIVILEGE
BEFORE OLER~ J.
OPINION and ORDER OF COURT
OLER, J., December 5, 2002.
In this appeal of an action taken by Appellee, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (hereinafter Department of
Transportation or Appellee), Appellant requests that this court rescind that part of a
license restoration requirements notice that required, as a prerequisite to scheduled
restoration of Appellant's driving privilege, that Appellant equip each of the vehicles
owned by him with an ignition interlock system.
For the reasons stated in this opinion, Appellant's appeal will be sustained.
DISCUSSION
The facts in the present case are not in dispute. In an underlying criminal case,
Appellant, having pled guilty on May 14, 2002, to driving under the influence,~ was
sentenced to pay the costs of prosecution and a fine, and to undergo a term of
imprisonment of two days to twenty-three months in the county prison.2 The sentencing
1 Order of Ct., May 14, 2002, Commonwealth v. Garretson, No. 02-0243 Criminal Term (Pa. Ct.
Com. Pl. Cumberland May 14, 2002 (Guido, J.)); see Commonwealth Ex. 1 Hr'g. Nov. 25, 2002.
2 Pet'r. Ex. 1, Hr'g. Nov. 25, 2002 (Order of Ct., June 18, 2002, Commonwealth v. Garretson,
No. 02-0243 Criminal Term (Pa. Ct. Com. Pl. Cumberland June 18, 2002 (Guido, J.)).
court did not include a requirement that Appellant install ignition interlock systems in his
vehicles?
Subsequent to this sentencing order, the Department of Transportation sent
Appellant a restoration requirements notice dated July 10, 2002, that detailed
prerequisites to restoration of his driving privilege. The Department of Transportation
required, as a prerequisite to scheduled restoration, that Appellant install an approved
ignition interlock system in each vehicle that he owned.4 The notice stated, in relevant
part, as follows:
Before your driving privilege can be restored you. are required by law to
have all vehicle(s) owned by you to be equipped with an Ignition Interlock
System. This is a result of your conviction for Driving Under the Influence.
If you fail to comply with this requirement, your driving privilege will
remain suspended for an additional year. You will receive more
information regarding this requirement approximately 30 days before your
eligibility date.5
On August 9, 2002, Appellant filed a Petition fi)r Appeal from Imposition of
Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension of Operator's Privilege.6 A
hearing was held on Appellant's appeal on November 25, 2002.
In Schneider v. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, 790 A.2d 363 (Pa.
Commw. Ct. 2002), the Commonwealth Court stated:
Although [the appellant] had two DUI-offenses and pursuant to
Section 7002(b), the trial court was required to order installation of an
ignition interlock device, that failure does not mean that PennDOT has been
given authority to override the trial court's order and require installation.
Section 7002 provides that only "the court shall order the installation on an
s Id. In Commonwealth v. Mockaitis, 50 Cumberland L.J. 184 (2001), a challenge to the
constitutionality of the statutory ignition interlock system refltfirement was upheld by the
Honorable Edgar B. Bayley of this court.
4 Commonwealth. Ex. 1, Hr'g. Nov. 25, 2002 (notice from Department of Transportation to
Appellant, dated Jul. 10, 2002).
5/d. (notice from Department of Transportation to Appellant, dated Jul. 10, 2002).
6 Appellant's Petition for Appeal from Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal
from Suspension of Operator's Privilege, filed Aug. 9, 2002. It is noted that the issue before the
court, by stipulation of the parties, was limited to the imposition of the ignition interlock
requirement. Order of Ct. Nov. 25, 2002.
approved ignition interlock device .... "Because this provision gives a court
the sole authority, PennDOT has no unilateral authority to impose ignition
interlock device requirements if the trial court fails to do so.
Id. at 366 (footnotes and citations omitted) (emphasis omitted).
Accordingly, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the trial court's order rescinding
the ignition interlock system provision in the suspension notice issued to the appellant by
the Department of Transportation. Id.
On this issue, Schneider is indistinguishable from the present case and,
accordingly, the same result must obtain herein. Appellant's appeal will be sustained,
without prejudice to Appellee's right to pursue a challenge to this holding, as prescribed
by Schneider, on appeal.
For the foregoing reasons, the following order will be entered:
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this 5th day of December, 2002, upon consideration of Appellant's
Petition from Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements and Appeal from Suspension
of Operator's Privilege, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying opinion, the
appeal is sustained to the extent that the portion of the Department of Transportation's
July I0, 2002, notice requiring Appellant to equip his vehicles with ignition interlock
systems, as a prerequisite to scheduled restoration of his driving privilege, is rescinded.*
BY THE COURT,
/s/J. Wesley Oler, Jr.
J. Wesley Oler, Jr., J.
George Kabusk, Esq.
Pennsylvania Department of Transportation
1101 South Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17104-2516
Attorney for Appellee
* By separate Order of Court, the appeal was dismissed to the extent that it implied a challenge to
the initial one-year suspension contained in the notice.
Paul Bradford Orr, Esq.
Law Offices of Paul Bradford Orr
50 East High Street
Carlisle, PA 17013
Attorney for Appellant