Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-2224-2002COMMONWEALTH V. GREGG THOMAS IRWIN IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 2224 - 2002 IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO Pa. R.A.P. 1925 Guido, J., March ,2004 The defendant filed an Omnibus Pretrial Motion which included a Motion to Suppress Evidence. On January 20, 2003, we conducted an evidentiary hearing in connection with the Motion to Suppress Evidence. After the hearing, we denied the motion. Defendant was convicted of various charges after a jury trial presided over by the Honorable J. Wesley Oler, Jr. He has filed a timely appeal from the judgment of sentence. Among the issues raised on appeal is the propriety of our decision refusing to grant his Motion to Suppress Evidence. Specifically, he alleges that the record contains insufficient facts upon which to base our conclusion that the officer had probable cause to stop the defendant's vehicle. follows.2 We will address that allegation of error in the opinion that FINDINGS OF FACT On July 25, 2002, at approximately 1:26 a.m., Officer Troy Wiser of the Mount Holly Springs Police Department was parked on West Butler Street at its intersection See Concise Statement of Matters Complained of on Appeal, paragraphs 1 and 2. Judge Oler will be addressing the remainder of the issues complained of on appeal. NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 2224 - 2002 with Pennsylvania Route 34.3 From that vantage point he observed a vehicle run the stop sign at the intersection of Creek Avenue with East Butler Street.4 In addition, he saw that the vehicle made a wide right turn through the intersection onto East Butler, almost striking a parked car in the process.5 The vehicle then turned left from East Butler Street onto Pennsylvania Route 34.6 Officer Wiser pulled onto Route 34 to follow it. He observed the vehicle cross the double yellow line and weave within its lane several times.7 As the officer noted, "It could not stay in a straight line.''8 Subsequently, he effectuated the traffic stop at issue and discovered that the defendant was driving while intoxicated. DISCUSSION The standard necessary for a proper vehicle stop was articulated by the Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Whitmeyer, 542 Pa. 545, 668 A.2d 1113 (1995) and reiterated in Commonwealth v. Gleason, 567 Pa. 111,785 A.2d 983, (200) as follows: If the alleged basis of a vehicular stop is to permit a determination whether there has been compliance with the Motor Vehicle code of this Commonwealth, it is incumbent [sic] upon the officer to articulate specific facts possessed by him, at the time of the questioned stop, which wouM provide probable cause to believe that the vehicle or the driver was in violation of some provision oft he Code. Whitmeyer, 668 A.2d at 1116, citing Swanger, 307 A.2d at 879 (emphasis added). 785 A.2d at 989. The determination of whether a stop is proper depends upon the facts of each case. As the Gleason Court stated: "a stop of a single vehicle is unreasonable where there is no outward sign the vehicle or the operator are in violation of the Vehicle Code .... 3 Transcript of Proceedings, pp. 9, 25. 4 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 10. 5 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 12. 6 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 13. 7 Transcript of Proceedings, pp. 13, 14. 8 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 14. NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 2224 - 2002 Before the government may single out one automobile to stop, there must be specific facts justifying this intrusion." Commonwealth v. Swanger, [453 Pa. 107,] 307 A.2d at 878 .... The legislature has vested police officers with the authority to stop vehicle whenever they have "articulable and reasonable grounds to suspect a violation" of the Vehicle Code. 75 Pa.C.S. § 6308(b). Whitmeyer, 668 A.2d at 1116-17. Commonwealth v. Gleason, 785 A.2d at 989, (emphasis added). Applying the above standard to the case at bar, we find that specific facts existed in this case to justify the intrusion. At the very least, the defendant's failure to stop at the stop sign posted at the intersection of Creek Avenue and East Butler Street provided Officer Wiser with articulable and reasonable grounds to suspect a violation of Section 3323(b) of the Vehicle Code.9 At the suppression hearing, the defendant strongly contended that the officer could not have seen him run the stop sign form his vantage point. The officer conceded that he could not see the stop sign itself. However, he was absolutely certain the defendant did not stop.l° As the officer explained in the following exchange: Again, if you couldn't see the stop sign, how did you make the determination that this car had allegedly run it? The incident was in July, so everything was fairly dried up from our drought. The vehicle had its headlights and taillights on. The vehicle was clearly visible approaching the stop intersection. The vehicle was not totally blocked by the tree at 100 percent any time. You could see that the vehicle proceeded straight through, swung wide, and almost struck a car on the other side of the street. ~ 9 75 Pa. C.S.A. § 3323 (b) provides in relevant part: Duties at stop signs.-Except when directed to proceed by a police officer or appropriately attired persons authorized to direct, control or regulate traffic, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop at a clearly marked stop line or, if none, before entering a crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the drive has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering. l0 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 49. ~ Transcript of Proceedings, p. 12. NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 2224 - 2002 While the officer could not see the stop sign, he could clearly see "the stop intersection."~2 We found the officer's testimony to the effect that he saw the defendant's vehicle run the stop sign to be credible. Furthermore, it was corroborated by one of the defendant's own witnesses.~3 Based upon that evidence alone, we were satisfied that the stop was proper. DATE Edward E. Guido, J. 12 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 37. 13 Transcript of Proceedings, p. 59.