Pennslyvania Probable Cause???

[jimbo222]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Pennsylvania

My friend got busted for his 3rd DUI Saturday night. He's in some big trouble, I know, and is seeking legal advice; but I was doing a little searching on probable cause and got interested. I know drinking and driving is bad but just want input on the legality of the stop. I've read this going both ways in different states, so keep in mind this is PA. Here's what happened...

Him and a friend of his were at a social club and then went to Denny's Restaurant for something to eat. The friend was driving because he does not drink and drive since his 2nd dui a couple years ago. Apparently they were acting drunk and the waitress called the police when they left to report a drunk driver.

The friend was WAY too drunk to drive, and not that he was any better, but he made the mistake to take her place in driving the car because he had to work in the morning and get home. The drive was only about 2 miles to his apartment so he thought "Just this once". The police stopped him a block away from his home and proceeded with field testing and then went for blood draw.

Having prior DUI's, he knows he was on the highest tier for BAC and the evidence he was drinking under the influence is undeniable. So my question is...

Well, first a couple assumptions....

1.) After the police started to follow the vehicle, there was no sign of any drunk driving (swerving, etc.)

2.) There were no errors in his driving (failure to put on turn signal, stopping properly at stop signs, etc.)

Basically there was no reason to stop the vehicle other than a "tip".

Is an anonymous tip enough probable cause to pull someone over in PA?

(I've read sometimes it is or isn't depending on if the "tipster" provided their name. I've also read in a lot of states this is not allowed because then anyone could call the police if they got mad at a driver (i.e. Cut off or given the finger) and have them wrongly stopped and harassed for DUI.)

Thanks for any input....What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[cyjeff]

Well, first a couple assumptions....

1.) After the police started to follow the vehicle, there was no sign of any drunk driving (swerving, etc.)

How do you know this?

You weren't there, right?

2.) There were no errors in his driving (failure to put on turn signal, stopping properly at stop signs, etc.)

You weren't there, right?

How do you know this?

Basically there was no reason to stop the vehicle other than a "tip".

You don't know that.

Is an anonymous tip enough probable cause to pull someone over in PA?

Of course it is.

(I've read sometimes it is or isn't depending on if the "tipster" provided their name. I've also read in a lot of states this is not allowed because then anyone could call the police if they got mad at a driver (i.e. Cut off or given the finger) and have them wrongly stopped and harassed for DUI.)

Then the police would go after the tipster for a false 911 call. In the meantime, they do tend to investigate tips.

 

[cyjeff]

I am always amazed, by the way, that someone can be WAY too drunk to drive (by their own estimation) and still be positive that they did NOTHING wrong while driving.

Amazing.

He could have pee'd himself without noticing, but his driving was perfect.

 

[CdwJava]

Depending on the specifics of PA case law, an "anonymous" tip can often be sufficient to justify a public safety exception to the 4th Amendment and permit an investigative detention. If the tip was sufficiently detailed to identify that vehicle and/or individual, and the reasons to believe the person was impaired, then the stop is likely valid.

Apparently the tip was pretty good and on the money!

But, if your only defense is to fight the stop, then you go for that.

 

[HighwayMan]

Obviously it was not an anonymous tip if you know it was the waitress.

 

[jimbo222]

Thanks for the input guys. The reasons I put "assumptions" was because I was thinking in hypothetical because we don't know. Once again, I no it was wrong, he shouldn't have been driving, and we think it had to have been the waitresses (the police said they received an anonymous tip....there was no one else it could have been and had the time to call with such a short 3 minute drive ahead of him). I was just looking at the law for probable cause for a stop on a tip only, assuming that there was no other reason. I know we don't know if there were other reasons. Maybe I should have started this with "hypothetically".

Good point with the police knowing who called though. Let's go with one more HYPOTHETICAL...

Waitress called but the conversation never revealed this. (police dispatcher didn't or forgot to get this)

Again, I'm curious of the law....in the end, his lawyer will easily be able to tell whether he has a "leg to stand on" with this. Just looking for probable cause feedback, not how stupid he could be or going either way with my assumptions. I listed them there to clarify a hypothetical situation, which in the end, could be his after all the evidence is provided. I do realize this is an extremely rare chance but I got curious and was wondering about probable cause law for stopping with a tip.....that's all. Thanks!

 

[BOR]

Pennsylvania Constitution:

Article 1; Declaration of Rights;

Security From Searches and Seizures
Section 8.
The people shall be secure in their persons, houses, papers and possessions from unreasonable searches and seizures, and no warrant to search any place or to seize any person or things shall issue without describing them as nearly as may be, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation subscribed by the affiant.


Pay a visit to a library where they have the PA Statutes, it does not have to be a law library, maybe the Main branch of the County Library system.

Look in the CONSTITUTION volumes what I just posted. After Section 8 there will be case law Annotations. See if any address such as you describe.

The FULL case citations, as those are just annotations/summaries, will have to looked up at a law library.

 

[swalsh411]

Thank you BOR for the entirely irrelevant lesson on the PA Constitution.

 

[BOR]

Thank you BOR for the entirely irrelevant lesson on the PA Constitution.

You on something??

 

[swalsh411]

You on something??

What you posted has nothing to do with the OP's situation.

 

[BOR]

What you posted has nothing to do with the OP's situation.

As I asked, are you on something??


Just where does a person look up PA case law then on thier S&S clause. Since you are an expert suppose you tell us??

 

[swalsh411]

As I asked, are you on something??


Just where does a person look up PA case law then on thier S&S clause. Since you are an expert suppose you tell us??

It appeared as though you were taking the position that the PA Constitution prohibited the police from stopping a vehicle when they had suspicion of impaired driving. Perhaps I was mistaken.

 

[BOR]

It appeared as though you were taking the position that the PA Constitution prohibited the police from stopping a vehicle when they had suspicion of impaired driving. Perhaps I was mistaken.

Yes, you were, try comprehensive reading before you shoot off your mouth and attack people.

 

[jimbo222]

Update: My friend and I just got home from court. A suppression motion was filed due to trying to fight the stop itself. The waitress that made the call did not show up for court although the arresting officers and another witness did. DA chose to non-prosecute. WOW!

 

[LeeHarveyBlotto]

Your friend needs to give up either drinking or driving before someone gets hurt or killed.