Legal Opinion · Dissent

Drabic v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 27, 2006No. 152 MAP 2005Published

1DissentJustice Newman

I respectfully dissent from the Majority Opinion. Additionally, I join the well-reasoned Dissenting Opinion of Mr. Justice *681Saylor in his discussion of Freundt v. PennDOT, 584 Pa. 283, 883 A.2d 503 (2005). I find myself bound by the plain language of 75 Pa.C.S. § 1532 and, therefore, would not utilize the criminal doctrine of merger in a civil matter where double jeopardy concerns are not implicated absent an express directive to do so by the Legislature. Because the statute at issue does not contain such language, I would uphold the separate suspensions for each individual offense for which…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Alabama v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Commonwealth v. AndersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Com., Dept. of Transp. v. McCaffertySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API