 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Williams v. Commonwealth3/17/2004
The Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (PennDOT) appeals from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County (trial court), which sustained the statutory appeal of Bryn J. Williams (Licensee) from a one-year suspension of his operating privileges by PennDOT pursuant to Article IV(a)(2) of the Driver's License Compact (Compact), Section 1581 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §1581. We affirm the trial court.
On July 21, 2002, Licensee, then a 20-year old college student, was stopped in Franklin County, Ohio and charged with the operation of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol (DUI). On July 31, 2002, Licensee appeared before the Franklin County Municipal Court in Columbus, Ohio, entered a plea of no contest and was convicted. As a result of that conviction, Licensee was sentenced in Ohio to a suspension of his Pennsylvania operating privileges for a period of 180 days, commencing on July 21, 2002.
On August 23, 2003, the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles provided PennDOT notice of Licensee's conviction. On September 25, 2002, PennDOT notified Licensee that it was treating his Ohio DUI conviction as if it were a conviction for violating 75 Pa. C.S. §3731 (driving under the influence) and suspending Licensee's operating privileges for one year. Licensee filed a timely notice of appeal with the trial court, which conducted a de novo hearing.
At the hearing, PennDOT offered into evidence without objection, certified documents to establish the underlying Ohio DUI conviction, including the conviction report, which contained the following information as a reason for conviction, "DUI-ALCOHOL/LIQUOR." It did not identify the Ohio statute under which the Licensee was convicted.
Licensee also testified. He stated that at the time of the incident he had taken a breathalyzer test and as a result of a reading of .065, he was charged with DUI. To this charge, he entered a plea of no contest, which he believed was "a lesser charge than a DUI." Reproduced Record 20a. (R.R. ___ ).
Licensee also submitted a sentence entry report issued by the Franklin County Court in the State of Ohio, which indicated that he was charged with a violation of Ohio Rev. Code §2133.01(a), a section under the Modified Uniform Rights of the Terminally Ill Act; it did not relate to Ohio's Vehicle Code. The trial court and respective counsel engaged in significant discussion on what exactly Licensee had been charged.
Licensee's Counsel (LC): And I looked up [Section] 2133 to determine whether or not it was, indeed, similar...[Section] 4511...is the statute with regard to operating under the influence.
Court: Yeah, but this is section - well, [Section] 2133 is entitled 21 probate/juvenile. Are theirs similar to ours?
LC: Under 2133 is the definition section. Court: Right.
LC: ...when I pulled it up, I'm trying to look at the statute that my client believes or was advised by virtue of receiving this sentencing form is the statute to which the nolo plea has been entered.
Court: All right. Well, is there a lesser included offense under Ohio law? There' an OMVI, operating motor vehicle while intoxicated, is that what those initials stand for? Is there another crime other than 4511.19? I don't know.
PennDOT Counsel: I don't know either, Your Honor, because I didn't know that he was convicted of a lesser included one. It wasn't specific in the notice until he showed me the statute this morning. I don't know which - I would take his testimony at face value that he was hit with the lesser one, but I'm not sure if it's included in the statute or not.
Court
Page 1 2 3 Pennsylvania DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|