Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout93-2183 Criminal COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : v. : 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 : MICHAEL J. CAMPBELL : AFFIANT: PTL. RODNEY SMITH OTN: B005059-5 : IN RE: DEFENDANT'S OMNIBUS PRETRIAL MOTION (MOTION TO SUPPRESS) BEFORE OLER, J. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this %%{~day of March, 1995, upon consideration of Defendant' s Omnibus Pretrial Motion to suppress evidence, following a hearing and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Opinion, the motion is DENIED. BY THE COURT, JJ' Wesley Oler, ~J~ Travis N. Gery, Esq. Assistant District Attorney Daniel J. Sodus, Esq. Court-appointed Attorney for Defendant : rc COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF : CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA : v. : 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 : MICHAEL J. CAMPBELL : AFFIANT: PTL. RODNEY SMITH OTN: B005059-5 : IN RE: DEFENDANT'S OMNIBUS PRETRIAL MOTION (MOTION TO SUPPRESS) BEFORE OLER, J. OPINION and ORDER OF COURT Oler, J. In this criminal case, Defendant is charged with unlawful possession of a small amount of marijuana and eight Vehicle Code offenses.~ For disposition at this time is a motion filed on his behalf to suppress evidence. The motion is based on an allegedly unlawful search of his clothing. A hearing on the motion was held on Monday, March 6, 1995. For the reasons stated in this Opinion, the motion will be denied. Statement of Facts On Friday, October 1, 1993, Defendant was operating a motorcycle, and carrying a passenger, in Middlesex Township, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, when he had an accident. Township Police Officer Rodney Smith responded to the scene. Defendant was pinned under the motorcycle with a broken leg. He was belligerent and combative with emergency personnel and did ~ Defendant allegedly violated provisions of the Vehicle Code respecting accidents involving death or personal injury, fraudulent use of a registration plate, reckless driving, operation of a vehicle without a certificate of inspection, required financial responsibility, registration required, driving under suspension, and classes of license. 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 not identify himself or supply other accident report information. His female companion, who was located about fifty feet from the motorcycle, was found to be intoxicated by the officer. She either would not, or could not, supply a name other than "Mike" for the operator. Officer Smith ascertained that the New York license plate on the motorcycle indicated a registered owner by the name of "Curtis Seanen." The officer proceeded to Harrisburg Hospital, where Defendant was transported, in an effort to complete an accident report. At the hospital, Defendant was combative with hospital personnel. When the officer attempted to interview him in his room, Defendant was unresponsive -- presenting the appearance, feigned or real, of lacking consciousness of the officer's presence. For the purpose of identifying the operator, Officer Smith looked through his clothing, which had been removed by medical personnel. Prior to discovering a billfold with identification, the officer found a bag of marijuana in a pocket in Defendant's jeans. Defendant was thereafter charged with the various offenses indicated above. Defendant's suppression motion was filed on November 30, 1994, and amended on December 7, 1994. On January 3, 1995, a bench warrant was issued for Defendant's arrest as a result 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 of his failure to appear in court for a pretrial conference. He remains a fugitive. Discussion Two factors warrant denial of Defendant's motion to suppress. First, as a fugitive he is not entitled to call upon the Court's resources for a determination of his claim. Second· on the facts the motion is not meritorious. With respect to the effect of a defendant's fugitive status on his or her right to secure judicial relief on an issue, it is well recognized that "one who invokes the jurisdiction of a tribunal and then flees has voluntarily waived or disentitled himself to call upon the resources of the Court for a determination of his claims." Commonwealth v. Kindler· 536 Pa. 228, 233, 639 A.2d 1, 3 (Papadakos, J.). cert. denied, __ U.S. , 115 S. Ct. 350, 130 L. Ed. 2d 287 (1994). A determination of the sanction to be imposed by a trial court in such circumstances appears to be within the sound discretion of the court. See Commonwealth v. Rhodes, __ Pa. · 645 A.2d 1294 (1994). In this case, the Court is of the view that a denial of the motion on the basis of Defendant's fugitive status is appropriate. With respect to the merits of Defendant's motion, it is noted that Section 3744(a) of the Vehicle Code imposes a duty upon an operator in Defendant's circumstances to supply certain information 3 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 to a police officer: The driver of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person or damage to any vehicle or other property which is driven or attended by any person shall give his name, address and the registration number of the vehicle he is driving, and shall upon request exhibit his driver's license and information relating to financial responsibility to any person injured in the accident or to the driver or occupant of or person attending any vehicle or other property damaged in the accident and shall give the information and upon request exhibit the license and information relating to financial responsibility to any police officer at the scene of the accident or who is investigating the accident .... Act of June 17, 1976, P.L. 162, ~1, as amended, 75 Pa. C.S. §3744(a) (1994 Supp.). Similarly, the police officer in this case was required to complete an accident report. Act of June 17, 1976, P.L. 162, ~1, as amended, 75 Pa. C.S. §3751(a) (1994 Supp.). "The threshold question ... in any Fourth Amendment inquiry is whether the conduct of the police amounted to a search. A search occurs when the government intrudes on an area where a person has a 'constitutionally protected reasonable expectation of privacy.'" Commonwealth v. Robbins, Pa. Super. , , 647 A.2d 555, 558 (1994). In a case in which a vehicle operator has been seriously injured in an accident, his clothing has been removed by medical personnel in the course of his treatment, his identity remains 4 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 unknown, and he presents the appearance of lacking consciousness of his surroundings, it seems to the Court that he could not reasonably expect his clothing to be overlooked as a possible source of identification by a police officer responsible for investigating the accident.2 In this context, the officer's conduct was less an intrusion upon the Defendant's privacy than a service in the course of his duties and was not, in the Court's view, an unreasonable action implicating the provisions of the fourth amendment. ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, this ~ ~ day of March, 1995, upon consideration of Defendant's Omnibus Pretrial Motion to suppress evidence, following a hearing and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Opinion, the motion is DENIED. BY THE COURT, s/ J. Wesley Oler, Jr. J. Wesley Oler, Jr., J. Travis N. Gery, Esq. Assistant District Attorney 2 A different situation would be presented had the officer been seeking evidence of a crime. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Silo, 509 Pa. 406, 502 A.2d 173 (1986). 5 2183 CRIMINAL 1993 Daniel J. Sodus, Esq. Court-appointed Attorney for Defendant .rc 6