Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-390 MISCELLANEOUSCOMMONWEALTH TIMOTHY A. FRITZ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 01-390 MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT Bayley, J., September , 2001:-- Defendant, Timothy A. Fritz, is charged with a count of hindering apprehension or prosecution in violation of the Crimes Code at 18 Pa.C.S. Section 5105(a)(1). He filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus upon which a hearing was conducted on August 28, 2001. We find the following facts. On April 10, 2001, at approximately 1:15 a.m., Trooper Dominic Nardone of the Pennsylvania State Police was dispatched to a one-vehicle accident in Cumberland County. He arrived at the scene of an overturned vehicle on a trafficway in an apartment complex. There was no registration plate on the vehicle. The trooper interviewed witnesses at the scene. A witness reported smelling a strong odor of alcohol on the driver. Witnesses said they saw the driver remove the registration plate after the accident. A witness provided the trooper with a partial Maryland tag number. Witnesses saw the driver flee. Trooper Nardone conducted an NCI check on the VIN of the vehicle. It was registered in Maryland to J.C. Porter. The Maryland registration contained the partial tag numbers that the witness had provided the trooper. 01-390 MISCELLANEOUS Four to six weeks before the April 10, 2001 incident, Trooper Nardone responded to a burglary in progress, during which J.C. Porter was apprehended and arrested. The trooper knew that Porter was from Maryland, that he had posted bail on the burglary charge, and the conditions of the bail included a provision that he not drink alcohol. During that investigation, Timothy Fritz, defendant herein, had given Trooper Nardone a statement regarding the burglary. Trooper Nardone knew that Fritz lived several hundred feet from the scene of the one-car accident on April 10th. Trooper Nardone went to Fritz's house, and Fritz came to the door. The trooper saw five people in the living room. None of them were Porter. Trooper Nardone asked Fritz if J.C. Porter was in his house. Fritz said that Porter was not there, but that he had been there earlier in the evening, and had left. Trooper Nardone asked Fritz if he could search the premises for Porter, and Fritz said "No." Trooper Nardone asked again, and Fritz said he would ask his roommate, who was upstairs. Fritz went upstairs. A short time later, Porter appeared and ran out the door. Trooper Nardone arrested Fritz for hindering apprehension or prosecution. Fritz then told the trooper that Porter had come to his residence, and said that he was in an automobile accident. Porter had asked him to lie, and he did lie when he told the trooper that Porter was not in his house. Fritz said only Porter, and not a roommate, had been upstairs. Defendant petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that the Commonwealth has not established a prima facie case that he violated Section 5105(a) of the Crimes Code. See Commonwealth v. Pachipko, 677 A.2d 1247 (Pa. Super. 1996). The -2- 01-390 MISCELLANEOUS Crimes Code at 18 Pa.C.S. Section 5105(a), provides in pertinent part: (a) Offense defined.--A person commits an offense if, with intent to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another for crime or violation of the terms of probation, parole, intermediate punishment or Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition, he: (1) harbors or conceals the other. (Emphasis added.) Defendant maintains that the Commonwealth has failed to produce sufficient evidence to establish, that at the time Trooper Nardone asked him if J.C. Porter was inside his house, an earlier crime had been committed by Porter. When Trooper Nardone asked defendant if Porter was inside his house, the Trooper, at the very least, had a reasonable suspicion that warranted an investigation of whether Porter was in violation of the conditions of his bail by drinking alcohol, and whether he had operated his motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol to a degree that rendered him incapable of safe driving.~ The trooper knew that, (1) Porter's vehicle had been involved in a rollover accident on a trafficway in an apartment complex,2 (2) the driver had a strong odor of alcohol on his breath, (3) the driver removed the registration from the vehicle and fled, (4) the vehicle was registered to J.C. Porter, and (5) Porter knew defendant who lived several hundred feet from the scene of the accident. In Commonwealth v. Lore, 338 Pa. Super. 42 (1984), the defendant raised the same issue as defendant raises herein. The Superior Court of Pennsylvania rejected the See Commonwealth v. Cameron, 447 Pa. Super. 233 (1995). 75 Pa.C.S. Section 3731(a). -3- 01-390 MISCELLANEOUS claim, stating: Evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction for a violation of section 5105 if the Commonwealth establishes, and a jury so finds, that beyond a reasonable doubt the appellant intended to hinder the apprehension or prosecution of another by performing any of the enunciated acts. This interpretation is wholly consistent with the comments to Model Penal Code § 242.3 (1962), which served as the prototype for section 5105, The majority of recent codification efforts have agreed with the Model Code position that this offense should be recharacterized as an obstruction of justice and accordingly have dispensed with the necessity that it be shown that the putative offender actually committed a crime and that the person rendering assistance was aware of that fact. Model Penal Code § 242.3 comment 3 (1980). (Emphasis added.) In the case sub judice, the Commonwealth has presented evidence to show that defendant harbored and concealed J.C. Porter from Trooper Nardone, thus obstructing the trooper's investigation of whether Porter had violated the conditions of his bail and whether he had been operating his motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol to a degree that rendered him incapable of safe driving. That is sufficient prima facie evidence to warrant submitting to a jury the charge of violating Section 5105(a)(1 of the Crimes Code. AND NOW, this a writ of habeas corpus, IS DENIED. ORDER OF COURT day of September, 2001, the petition of defendant for -4- 01-390 MISCELLANEOUS By the Court, Jaime Keating, Esquire For the Commonwealth Dirk E. Berry, Esquire For Defendant :saa Edgar B. Bayley, J. -5-