Pritchett v. PENNDOT
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed the trial court’s order, which sustained Licensee’s appeal from PENNDOT’s 12-month suspension of his driving privileges. The Court held that a trooper had reasonable grounds
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court reversed the trial court’s order, which sustained Licensee’s appeal from PENNDOT’s 12-month suspension of his driving privileges. The Court held that a trooper had reasonable grounds
The Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that the defendant waived her appellate claims. After the Commonwealth charged DUI and other crimes, the defendant did not file a pretrial omnibus motion. The
After the defendant was found guilty of DUI, the sentencing court refused to consider one of the defendant’s prior DUIs from Maryland as a triggering offense for an enhanced sentence.
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court squeezed in two crucial holdings regarding driver’s license suspensions resulting from DUI convictions. Vellon was arrested for DUI and was accepted into ARD. But he violated
The Pennsylvania Superior Court reviewed an order denying the defendant’s first PCRA petition after being convicted of DUI and sentenced as a second-time offender. The first DUI was based on
The Pennsylvania Superior Court ruled that a juvenile adjudication of delinquency for DUI qualifies as a first offense for sentence enhancement purposes. While she was on probation for her guilty
The Pennsylvania Superior Court affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief for a defendant who made allegations of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The case was a pre-Birchfield blood-draw DUI. The
In Commonwealth v. Banks, the defendant appealed his convictions of DUI, VUFA, and related charges. On appeal, he claimed: 1. the evidence was insufficient to convict him of DUI, and
Commonwealth v. Eid presented the Pennsylvania Supreme Court with constitutional challenges to the Vehicle Code’s enhancement of sentences for those who refuse chemical testing after driving under a suspended license.
In Commonwealth v. Vela-Garrett, the Pennsylvania Superior Court addressed the defendant’s argument that his conviction for endangering the welfare of a child (EWOC) was not supported by sufficient evidence. The
Copyright Sullivan Simon.
All rights reserved.