Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-1703-2005 COMMONWEAL TH IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. TRAVIS WAYNE RODRICK CP-21-CR-1703-2005 IN RE: MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE BEFORE BAYLEY. J. OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., October 31, 2005:-- Defendant, Travis Wayne Rodrick is charged with driving under the influence,1 driving under suspension,2 and careless driving.3 He filed a motion to suppress evidence upon which a hearing was conducted on October 25, 2005. We find the following facts. On May 5,2005, at approximately 1 :00 a.m., Corporal Jeffrey Shubert of the Shippensburg Borough Police, while on patrol in a marked police car in the Borough of Shippensburg, was at the intersection of Walnut Bottom Road and East King Street. Defendant was driving a vehicle that was stopped at a red traffic signal on Walnut Bottom Road. When the signal turned green, he turned left onto East King Street. Officer Shubert heard a squealing noise from his tires, and saw that the back tires lost some traction. As defendant proceeded on East King Street, Corporal Shubert heard 175 Pa.C.S. S 3802(a)(1) and (c). 275 Pa.C.S. S 1543(a). CP-21-CR-1703-2005 the tires squeal again. No smoke came from the tires, no stones were thrown up, nor did the vehicle fishtail. Officer Shubert stopped the vehicle because, in his words, the manner of driving by defendant was "unnecessary," and "it produced unreasonable noise.,,4 Defendant filed a motion to suppress all evidence obtained by the police after the stop, maintaining that the stop was illegal. Police officers have authority to stop a vehicle when they have articulable and reasonable grounds to believe that there has been a violation of the Vehicle Code. See Commonwealth v. Whitmyer, 668 A.2d 1113 (Pa. 1995). The mere squealinq of tires and the loss of some traction, without more, did not provide Officer Shubert articulable and reasonable grounds to believe that defendant violated any provisions of the Vehicle Code, including careless driving. Nor did what the officer heard provide him articulable and reasonable grounds to believe that defendant committed disorderly conduct in violation of the Crimes Code at 18 Pa. C. S. Section 5503, that provides: (a) Offense defined.-A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he: . . . (2) makes unreasonable noise (Emphasis added.) For the foregoing reasons, the following order is entered. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _ day of October, 2005, the motion of defendant to suppress 375 Pa.C.S. S 3714. -2- CP-21-CR-1703-2005 all evidence obtained by the police following the stop of his vehicle, IS GRANTED. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Christin J. Mehrtens-Carlin, Esquire For the Commonwealth H. Anthony Adams, Esquire F or Defendant :sal 4 There was no testimony that any other vehicles or persons were in the area. -3- COMMONWEAL TH IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA V. TRAVIS WAYNE RODRICK CP-21-CR-1703-2005 IN RE: MOTION OF DEFENDANT TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE BEFORE BAYLEY. J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this _ day of October, 2005, the motion of defendant to suppress all evidence obtained by the police following the stop of his vehicle, IS GRANTED. By the Court, Edgar B. Bayley, J. Christin J. Mehrtens-Carlin, Esquire For the Commonwealth H. Anthony Adams, Esquire F or Defendant :sal