Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sweeney v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 3, 2002Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge FRIEDMAN.

I respectfully dissent. Here, the licensee presented: (1) credible expert testimo*690ny that an Intoxilyzer 5000 with a resistance setting above three pounds per square inch may prevent a sober and healthy person from providing sufficient breath samples; (2) evidence accepted by the trial court that the licensee was sober and healthy at the time of the Intoxilyzer 5000 breath test; and (3) credible testimony that the licensee made her best effort to provide sufficient breath samples. Unlike the majority, I would hold that, when a licensee presents such…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Todd v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  2. Burke v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver LicensingCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Baldinger v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  4. Commonwealth v. WilliamsonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
  5. Thomas v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API