Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-814 CivilTHOMAS B. MORRISON VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PA., DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION INRE: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-814 CIVIL IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE APPEAL BEFORE HESS. J. OPINION AND ORDER This is an appeal from action taken by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing. The appellant seeks rescission of that portion of a Restoration Requirements Letter which requires him to drive only vehicles equipped with an ignition interlock system. There is no dispute regarding the facts. On February 14, 2002, the defendant was sentenced on a count of driving under the influence to pay a fine of $300.00 and undergo imprisonment in the Perry County Prison for not less than forty-eight hours nor more than twelve months. Judge Quigley did not include a requirement that the appellant install an ignition interlock system in his vehicle. Almost a year later, the Department of Transportation sent Mr. Morrison a Restoration Requirements Letter dated January 17, 2003. One of the requirements set out in the letter was that the appellant install an approved ignition interlock system in each vehicle that he owns. His appeal from this requirement was taken on February 25, 2003. The Commonwealth has moved to quash the appeal as untimely. 03-0814 CIVIL With regard to the timeliness of the appellant's petition, we are satisfied that under the authority of Watterson v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation Bureau of Driver Licensing, 816 A.2d 1225 (Pa. Commw. 2002), Mr. Morrison's appeal may be heard. In Schneider v. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, 790 A.2d 363 (Pa. Commw. 2002), the Commonwealth Court held that PennDOT has no unilateral authority to impose ignition interlock device requirements if the court fails to do so. In this case, Judge Quigley's sentencing order did not include such a requirement. Accordingly, Schneider controls the outcome of the instant matter. ORDER AND NOW, this day of May, 2003, upon consideration of Appellant's Petition for Appeal from Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements, 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 January 17, 2003 notice requiring him to equip his vehicles with ignition interlock systems, as a prerequisite to scheduled restoration of his driving privilege, is rescinded. BY THE COURT, P. Richard Wagner, Esquire For the Petitioner George Kabusk, Esquire For PennDOT :rlm Kevin A. Hess, J. 2 THOMAS B. MORRISON VS. COMMONWEALTH OF PA., DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION INRE: AND NOW, this IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 03-814 CIVIL IGNITION INTERLOCK DEVICE APPEAL BEFORE HESS. J. ORDER day of May, 2003, upon consideration of Appellant's Petition for Appeal from Imposition of Ignition Interlock Requirements, 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 January 17, 2003 notice requiring him to equip his vehicles with ignition interlock systems, as a prerequisite to scheduled restoration of his driving privilege, is rescinded. BY THE COURT, P. Richard Wagner, Esquire For the Petitioner George Kabusk, Esquire For PennDOT :rim Kevin A. Hess, J.