header image
Home arrow FAQ for DUI in York arrow DUI News arrow Officer arriving at disabled vehicle does not "seize" driver
Officer arriving at disabled vehicle does not "seize" driver PDF Print E-mail
In Commonwealth v. Conte, 1805 M.D.A. 2006, the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled on August 2, 2007, that an officer who approaches a disabled vehicle alongside the road and who activates the overhead lights and approaches the apparent driver does not "seize" the driver for purposes of the Pennsylvania or United States constitutions.  The officer's observations of "classic" signs of intoxication were admissible and the conviction of the driver for DUI was sustained.
Back
Newsflash
In a decision issued on April 25, 2008, a panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that an investigatory stop of a car with a loud muffler was permitted where the investigating officer did not have any of the required, specialized training necessary to issue a noise citation for faulty exhaust. During the stop, the driver was arrested for DUI. No muffler violation was ever filed. This decision essentially validates a form of pretext stops in Pennsylvania. The full text of the case can be found here. The dissent raises serious and legitimate concerns about the potential for abuse that this decision permits.