Commonwealth v. Copenhaver v. Aplt.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
229 A.3d 242 (Pa. 2020) (2020)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

For the purpose of a deputy sheriff's common law authority to enforce the Vehicle Code, a 'breach of the peace' is defined as an act or circumstance that causes harm to persons or property, has a reasonable potential to cause such harm, or tends to provoke violence, danger, or disruption to public order.

Facts:

In August 2015, a deputy sheriff observed Copenhaver driving a pickup truck.
The deputy noticed that the truck's tailgate was in a down position.
The deputy further observed that the registration sticker on the truck was expired.
Additionally, the registration number on the truck actually belonged to a different vehicle.
Based on these observations, the deputy initiated a traffic stop of Copenhaver's vehicle.
Upon approaching the vehicle, the deputy smelled alcohol and marijuana coming from the passenger compartment.
The deputy administered field sobriety tests and subsequently arrested Copenhaver for driving under the influence.

Procedural Posture:

The Commonwealth charged Copenhaver with DUI and other offenses in the Court of Common Pleas.
Copenhaver filed a motion to suppress evidence, arguing the deputy lacked authority to conduct the stop.
The Court of Common Pleas denied the motion to suppress.
Following a bench trial, the Court of Common Pleas convicted Copenhaver and sentenced him.
Copenhaver appealed the denial of suppression to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
The Superior Court affirmed the judgment of sentence, holding that the expired registration was a breach of the peace.
Copenhaver petitioned the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania for allowance of appeal.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does operating a motor vehicle with an expired registration sticker constitute a 'breach of the peace' sufficient to authorize a deputy sheriff to conduct a traffic stop under common law?

Opinions:

Majority - Chief Justice Saylor

No, operating a vehicle with an expired registration sticker does not constitute a breach of the peace because it involves no violence, danger, or disruption to public order. The Court reasoned that historically, a breach of the peace requires an 'outward, visible, audible or violent demonstration' rather than quiet or passive acts. Relying on precedents like Commonwealth v. Sherman and persuasive authority from other states, the Court determined that the concept implies conduct that incites violence or threatens public safety, such as driving under the influence. In contrast, an expired registration is merely a passive administrative violation resulting from the passage of time. Because driving with an expired sticker does not threaten safety or incite disorder, it does not meet the legal standard for a breach of the peace required to justify a deputy sheriff's stop under common law. Consequently, the Court vacated the lower court's decision, though it remanded the case to determine if the other factor—the registration belonging to a different vehicle—justified the stop.

Analysis:

This decision significantly clarifies and limits the police powers of sheriffs and their deputies in Pennsylvania. Unlike municipal police officers who have statutory authority to enforce the Vehicle Code generally, sheriffs rely on residual common law authority which is restricted to breaches of the peace committed in their presence. By defining 'breach of the peace' narrowly to require actual or potential harm, violence, or public disruption, the Court prevents deputies from conducting traffic stops for minor, non-dangerous administrative violations. This distinction protects citizens from unauthorized law enforcement actions while preserving the sheriff's authority to intervene in genuinely dangerous situations like DUI.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Commonwealth v. Copenhaver v. Aplt. (2020)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"