Commonwealth v. Allen

*135CIRILLO, President Judge,

concurring and dissenting:

I concur in the majority’s disposition of the “re-arrest” issue but write separately to further define the term “re-arrest.” In addition, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s finding that the Commonwealth’s evidence was sufficient to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Allen drove while his blood alcohol level exceeded .10 percent.

The Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure do not define the term “re-arrest,” and the majority correctly notes that “[tjhere is no authority which requires the Commonwealth to re-arrest a person to begin…