DUI Appeal

Published on: October 3, 2016

Pennsylvania Appeals Court Rejects Contention That Appellant’s Sentence Violates Ex Post Facto Clause

by Zachary B. Cooper, Attorney at Law, P.C.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently rejected an appellant’s contention that her sentencing as a repeat offender for her DUI conviction resulted in ex post facto punishment.

In January 2015, appellant Kriz Kizak was charged with DUI General Impairment/Incapable of Safe Driving (75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(A)(1)) and DUI Highest Rate of Alcohol (75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(B)) for a December 2014 incident. She pled guilty in May 2015. In July, Kizak was sentenced under the second charge to undergo imprisonment in the Centre County Correctional Facility for a period of not less than 30 days nor more than six months. Kizak was sentenced as a second offender because she was also charged with DUI for an incident that occurred on September 24, 2014. Moreover, Kizak was accepted into the Accelerated Rehabilitation Disposition (ARD) program on the first offense DUI. Kizak filed a post-sentence motion, which was denied.

Published on: September 1, 2016

Pennsylvania Appellate Court Reverses DUI Conviction in Light of McNeely

by Zachary B. Cooper, Attorney at Law, P.C.

The Pennsylvania Superior Court recently reversed and remanded a defendant’s DUI convictions in light of the United States Supreme Court’s holding in Missouri v. McNeely.

In December 2012, Philadelphia Police Officer Amina Oliver observed defendant Stacey Lane’s vehicle blocking a lane on Loudon Street. Lane exited his car and shouted: “Stacey Lane got love for Logan.” (Logan is the name of the neighborhood where the incident occurred.) Lane continued to scream at passing cars. Officer Oliver noticed that Lane had dilated pupils, and his body and car smelled strongly of PCP. Oliver called for a police car to take Lane to the hospital.

Published on: August 25, 2016

Pennsylvania Appeals Court Holds DUI Defendant Not Constitutionally Entitled to Jury Trial

by Zachary B. Cooper, Attorney at Law, P.C.

A Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently affirmed appellant Ryan O. Langley’s appeal of his convictions of DUI and driving at an unsafe speed. The court upheld prior precedent holding that (1) an information is required to include facts that might increase the penalty when setting forth the essential elements; and (2) a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial for DUI because the Pennsylvania legislature has categorized the violation as petty for the purposes of a defendant’s jury trial rights.

In November 2013, police responded to a report of a car accident in Lower Merion, Pennsylvania. While investigating the scene, officers spoke with Langley and noticed the odor of alcohol on his breath. After failing field sobriety testing, Langley was placed under arrest for DUI. His BAC was determined to be .092%.

Published on: August 10, 2016

Pennsylvania Superior Court Quashes DUI Appeal as Untimely

by Zachary B. Cooper, Attorney at Law, P.C.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently quashed Zebrick Hyreshie Jones’s appeal from his DUI judgement as untimely.

In April 2014, Trooper Allar arrived beside a disabled vehicle on the shoulder of I-81. Trooper Allar observed damage to the hood and passenger side of the vehicle and a broken front-passenger window. The appellant was in the process of changing the left rear tire, while his girlfriend remained in the passenger seat. Trooper Allar inquired Jones as to the cause of the accident, to which he replied: “I slipped and hit a tractor trailer.”