From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Peth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jun 16, 1989
560 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1989)

Summary

In Commonwealth v. Peth, 522 Pa. 136, 560 A.2d 139 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Drake, 452 Pa.Super. 315, 681 A.2d 1357 (1996), the courts recognized non-standardized field sobriety test results are admissible in DUI prosecutions because they allow an ordinary observer to opine whether a person is intoxicated based on his or her coordination and concentration as shown by his or her acts and speech.

Summary of this case from Cole v. Com., Dept. of Transp

Opinion

June 16, 1989.

Petition No. 330 W.D. ALLOCATUR DKT. 1988 for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of Superior Court entered May 18, 1988, at No. 1309 Pittsburgh, 1987, affirming the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County, Criminal Division, dated September 9, 1987, at No. 316 Criminal, 1987.


ORDER


And now this 16th day of June, 1989, the Application for Reconsideration is granted. The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is granted. The Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Mercer County dated September 9, 1987, at No. 316 Criminal 1987, is hereby reversed as to that portion of the order which suppressed defendant's response to the question of whether he had been drinking made at the scene of the crime and his responses to the A-B-C field sobriety test at the scene of the crime and further as to his response to the inquiries on the D U I Alcohol Influence Form. Case is remanded to the Court of Common Pleas for further proceedings.


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Peth

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jun 16, 1989
560 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1989)

In Commonwealth v. Peth, 522 Pa. 136, 560 A.2d 139 (1989) and Commonwealth v. Drake, 452 Pa.Super. 315, 681 A.2d 1357 (1996), the courts recognized non-standardized field sobriety test results are admissible in DUI prosecutions because they allow an ordinary observer to opine whether a person is intoxicated based on his or her coordination and concentration as shown by his or her acts and speech.

Summary of this case from Cole v. Com., Dept. of Transp
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Peth

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner, v. William Clair PETH

Court:Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Jun 16, 1989

Citations

560 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1989)
560 A.2d 139

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Leib

In support of this proposition, appellant cites only to this Court's opinion in Commonwealth v. Bruder, 365…

Com. v. Drake

Moreover, our Supreme Court has explicitly allowed the admission into evidence of the results of a field test…