Legal Opinion
COM. DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Ingram
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided September 13, 1994PublishedCited by 90 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MONTEMURO, Justice.
The issue raised in these consolidated appeals is whether the police satisfied the warning requirements set out by this Court in Commonwealth, Dept. of Transp., Bureau of Traffic Safety v. O’Connell, 521 Pa. 242, 555 A.2d 873 (1989), even *240though the police failed to explain to a licensee the reason why his constitutional Miranda1 rights are inapplicable to chemical testing pursuant to the implied consent provision of the Motor Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1547(a) (1982).2 We hold that the police need not clarify for the motorist the distinction between criminal…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Com., Dept. of Transp. v. O'CONNELLSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
- Commonwealth v. DanforthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Commonwealth v. EisenhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Commonwealth v. McFaddenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by90 opinions
- Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Com., Dept. of Transp. v. RenwickSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- COM., DEPT. OF TRANS. v. ScottSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Todd v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
- COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. BoucherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.