HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-0061 CRIMINALCOMMONWEALTH IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY,
PENNSYLVANIA
02-0061 CRIMINAL
CHARGE: (1) DUI
(2) DRIVING UNDER
SUSPENSION (SUMMARY)
V (3) TURNING MOVEMENTS
& REQUIRED SIGNALS (SUM.)
(4) VIOLATIONS
CONCERNING LICENSE (SUM.)
MICHAEL JOHN NElL
OTN: H227232-5
IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO PA. R.A.P. 1925
HOFFER, P.J.
On October 26, the Trooper Styres arrested Michael John Neil for motor
vehicle violations. This court previously heard defendant's Motion to Suppress
Evidence, and denied it. The only issue was whether Trooper Styres had
probable cause or reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant
FACTS
At approximately 9:05 p.m. on October 26, 2001, Trooper Styres was
sitting in his patrol car off to the side and overlooking State Route 696 in
Cumberland County, near the town of Shippensburg. He observed defendant's
vehicle traveling forty miles an hour, although it was a fifty mile per hour zone,
then slow down and turn into the Classic Car Lot without using a turning signal.
He then watched the actions of the defendant while in the car lot. The business
was closed. Although it was dark outside, there was a light coming from the
business sign and Trooper Styres was located in such a way that he could clearly
see everything.
The defendant stopped his car and left the car. He disappeared from the
Trooper's view when he went between two parked cars in the lot. The defendant
returned to his vehicle a few moments later and began to drive away. However,
he paused for a considerable time at the exit from the lot. It was at this point that
Trooper Styres pulled behind the defendant and turned on his patrol car's
emergency lights.
Trooper Styres testified that he stopped the vehicle for several reasons.
First, the defendant had violated 75 Pa.C.S. §3334 when he failed to use his
turning signal when turning into the car lot. Second, the defendant had exhibited
suspicious behavior in a deserted car lot, and he felt it was his duty to further
investigate the situation. In doing so after the stop, the Trooper discerned that the
defendant was inebriated and eventually arrested him for driving while under the
influence of alcohol.
DISCUSSION
The Trooper had probable cause to stop the vehicle because of the
defendant's violation of 75 Pa.C.S. §3334. See, Commonwealth v. Gray, 20 D&C
4th 133 (Westmoreland County 1993). A trooper must clearly observe facts that
support a violation of the Vehicle Code in order to show probable cause to stop a
motor vehicle. Commonwealth v. Haynes, 730 A.2d 960, 962 (Pa. Super. 1999).
Trooper Styres did articulate facts to support such a violation. He observed that
the defendant did not use a turning signal when turning into the car lot.