A man suspected of driving under the influence in Waco, Texas, apparently almost succeeded where the Big Bad Wolf had failed.
"The biggest scandal in the history of alcohol testing."
Deaths from drunk drivers are occurring in Pennsylvania at an alarming rate. Yet, in spite of the hard facts provided by PennDOT and AAA, lawmakers at the state capital do not seem to be in a rush to make criminal penalties harsher.
DUI. DRUNK DRIVING. DRUGGED DRIVING
Appeal Suspension of License for Refusal to Submit to Chemical Testing: A Pennsylvania driver appealed the suspension of his driver's license to the Commonwealth Court of PA, arguing that the trial court lacked sufficent evidence and committed several legal errors. The Commonwealth Court disagreed and affirmed the sustension. Blalock v. Commonwealth, No. 1592 C.D. 2012, opinion (Pa. Commonwealth Court, May 28, 2013). In the order, the court stated that it could only consider whether the trial court abused its discretion, not whether the court got the facts wrong. Since license suspension challenges are a civil proceeding rather than a criminal one, the burden of proof is much lower for the prosecution. Both, the trial court and the Commonwealth Court relied on the arresting officers' testimony that the driver showed signs of intoxication during the arrest. The police stated that the driver exhibited signs of intoxication DUI, such as slow and deliberate movements, slurred speach, confusion, and a "faint to moderate" smell of alcohol. Appellant failed the field sobriety tests. The officer claimed that he read the Form DL-26 warnings to him, which advise of the consequences of refusing chemical testing, and that he signed the form but refused to submit to tests. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDot) suspended appellant's license for one (1) year, which the law permits if a suspected DUI driver refuses chemical testing. He appealed the matter to the Court of Common Pleas and lost.