J-A22003-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
DALE ROBERT MONROE
Appellant No. 101 MDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence December 13, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of York County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-67-CR-0001005-2013
BEFORE: PANELLA, J., SHOGAN, J., and FITZGERALD, J.*
JUDGMENT ORDER BY PANELLA, J. FILED FEBRUARY 19, 2015
Appellant, Dale Robert Monroe, appeals from the judgment of sentence
entered December 13, 2013, by the Honorable John S. Kennedy, Court of
Common Pleas of York County. No relief is due.
The trial court summarized the facts of this case as follows.
On December 10, 2012, at 6:47 p.m., Officer Albert
Miles, was on patrol in his marked police vehicle, stationed
at the Fawn Grove Boro Rutter[’]s parking lot. During his
patrol he noticed a [b]lack 2008 Chevrolet Silverado
parked in a parking [space] with a white male driver in the
driver’s seat. Pursuant to his normal job duties, he ran a
PennDOT records check which indicated that the registered
owner, Dale Robert Monroe, the Appellant in this case, had
a license status of DUI Suspended. The officer then pulled
up the PennDOT picture of the registered owner and it
matched the white male sitting in the driver seat. The
____________________________________________
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A22003-14
officer observed the vehicle from a distance until the
vehicle began to pull out of the Rutter’s parking lot. Upon
exiting the parking lot, the officer activated his emergency
lights and conducted a traffic stop.
Officer Miles approached the vehicle and explained to
the driver why he pulled him over. The driver related to
the officer that he had a license, but handed him, instead,
a change of address card. The driver then related that he
does not have a picture license. The driver then handed
the officer his oil change paper work along with his
registration and insurance. While engaging the driver, the
officer detected a moderate odor of an alcoholic beverage
emanating from the driver’s breath and person. The
driver’s eyes were also bloodshot and glassy. The driver
indicated that he had not been drinking, when questioned.
Officer Miles identified the driver as Dale Monroe, the
Appellant in this case, by his passport. Appellant related
that there was alcohol in one of the cup holders. Officer
Miles requested that Appellant exit the vehicle and perform
field sobriety tests. When Appellant opened the door, the
officer observed an open glass bottle of Bud Light Lime in
the driver['s] door cup holder that was half-full. Upon
exiting the vehicle, Appellant was unsure of his footing.
Upon complete of field sobriety tests, Officer Miles
placed Appellant into custody and transported him to York
Hospital for a blood draw. The lab results indicated a
blood alcohol content of .101, and the presence of
Diazepam, Nordiazepam, and Morphone-Free in Appellant’s
blood.
Trial Court Opinion, 3/14/14 at 2-3 (unnumbered).
Appellant was arrested and charged with four counts of Driving Under
the Influence of Alcohol or Controlled Substance,1 Driving While BAC .02 or
Greater While License Suspended-DUI Related,2 Careless Driving,3 and
____________________________________________
1
75 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3802(a)(1), (b), (d)(1)(ii) and (d)(3).
2
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1543(b)(1.1)(i).
-2-
J-A22003-14
Restriction of Alcoholic Beverages.4 Appellant filed an Omnibus Pre-Trial
Motion to suppress physical evidence. Following a suppression hearing, the
trial court denied Appellant’s motion. A bench trial was conducted and the
trial court convicted Appellant of two counts of DUI5 and Driving While BAC
.02 or Greater While License Suspended-DUI Related. The trial court
sentenced Appellant on December 13, 2013. This timely appeal followed.
On appeal, Appellant argues that Officer Miles lacked both reasonable
suspicion to believe that a violation of the vehicle code had occurred and
probable cause to believe that Appellant was driving while impaired. We
have reviewed Appellant’s brief, the relevant law, the certified record, and
the well-written opinion of the able trial judge, the Honorable John S.
Kennedy. We find that the trial court’s opinion, filed on March 14, 2014, ably
and comprehensively disposes of Appellant’s issues on appeal, with
appropriate reference to the record and without legal error. Therefore, we
affirm on the basis of that opinion.
_______________________
(Footnote Continued)
3
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3714.
4
75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3809.
5
75 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 3802(b) and (d)(1)(ii).
-3-
J-A22003-14
Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 2/19/2015
-4-
Circulated 01/29/2015 12:37 PM
I""
~,.! '
!..~ ,
!.J. -- - -
----
---tt1
1fr----------
----
----
---- - - - - -
----
----
---------------------4
t-
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
COMMONWEALTH OF No. CP-67-CR-I00S-2013
!.!.
PENNSYLVANIA ' .....,
tt;:;)
(,") (\....
r-
TT'10
'3;
,.,.. c: ::
eJ"< r
VS. ;1:}O :tl. -c:.'\(
I''':
;:r.;:2t :;;:d g~c
~~C
qO ~>~'~-'II:
~>~~~ "';
DALE R. MONROE -rl