Commonwealth v. Becraft

615 A.2d 967, 150 Pa. Commw. 380, 1992 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 585
CourtCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedSeptember 4, 1992
DocketNo. 62 C.D. 1992
StatusPublished

This text of 615 A.2d 967 (Commonwealth v. Becraft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Commonwealth v. Becraft, 615 A.2d 967, 150 Pa. Commw. 380, 1992 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 585 (Pa. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PELLEGRINI, Judge.

The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (Department) appeals an Order of the Berks County Court of Common Pleas sustaining an appeal of William Dale Becraft (Becraft) from the Department’s action in suspending his operating privileges for 60 days for his conviction for failing to stop for a school bus with flashing red lights.

On September 26, 1990, Becraft was stopped by a member of the Middlesex Township Police Department in Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, and issued a citation for violation of Section 3345(a) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3345(a), for passing a school bus with flashing red lights. At the time of the violation, Becraft was on active military duty with the United States Army National Guard and was driving a United States Army vehicle on official business but not pursuant to an emergency situation. Becraft possessed both a valid Pennsylvania driver’s license and a valid military driver’s license. Becraft only presented the officer with his Pennsylvania driver’s license.

On December 10, 1990, a hearing was held before a local District Justice regarding Becraft’s citation and he was found [383]*383guilty and ordered to pay a $184.00 fíne. (25a-26a).1 Becraft appealed his conviction to the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas. On appeal, Becraft requested a change in the designation of his conviction from his Pennsylvania driver’s license number 16240596 to his United States Government Motor Vehicle Operator’s Identification Card Number ARNG125-88, which the Court granted. (56a).

On April 17, 1991, prior to the change in designation by the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas, the Department mailed an official notice to Becraft advising him that five points had been assessed against his Pennsylvania driving record, and that his operating privilege was scheduled to be suspended for 60 days pursuant to Section 1535 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1535. Becraft then appealed the Department’s action to the Berks County Court of Common Pleas (trial court).

The trial court held a de novo hearing and sustained Becraft’s appeal. The trial court held that because the Cumberland County Court of Common Pleas designated that the conviction should be charged to Becraft’s military license, the Department had no power to suspend Becraft’s Pennsylvania operating privileges. (56a). The trial court relied on Section 1502(2) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1502(2), which exempts members of the United States Armed Forces from obtaining a Pennsylvania driver’s license when they are furnished with a valid military driver’s license and operating an official vehicle on official business. (56a-57a). In its Order, the trial court stated that “any action taken by the ... Department ... against [Becraft] should be taken against his military license #ARNG-125-88 and not his Pennsylvania license.” (45a). The Department now appeals.2

[384]*384The Department contends that the trial court erred as a matter of law when it directed that any action must be taken against Becraft’s military license. The Department argues that while it recognizes that it has no power to suspend Becraft’s military operating privilege, it can suspend Becraft’s civilian Pennsylvania operating privilege, even though he was driving under a military license, citing the rationale of our decision in Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Cern, 145 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. 647, 604 A.2d 1135 (1992). Becraft contends that because he was driving a military vehicle under a military license, the matter is one of military supremacy and the only action which can be taken is by the military against his military license. We agree with the Department and will reverse.

In Cern, this Court held that the Department could not revoke a non-resident’s out-of-state “driver’s license,” the Department could revoke the Pennsylvania “operating privilege” of a New Jersey resident licensed in New Jersey as a habitual offender for three traffic offenses committed while driving in Pennsylvania. We held that while Section 1502(3) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1502(3), exempts non-residents from the licensing requirements, Section 1546(a) of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1546(a), empowers the Department to suspend or revoke the “privilege of driving a motor vehicle on the highways of the Commonwealth given to a non-resident ... in like manner and for like cause as a resident’s operating privilege.” Id. at 654, 604 A.2d at 1139.

Even though the Department cannot suspend Becraft’s military operating privileges, the rationale in Cem that the Department can suspend the Pennsylvania operating privilege of a non-resident driver also applies to a member of the military, whether a resident or non-resident, operating a military vehicle pursuant to a military license on public highway in this Commonwealth which is not involved in an emergency military situation. The military license is to be treated the same as a non-resident’s out-of-state driver’s license.

[385]*385Moreover, a review of applicable Federal Governmental regulations concerning the operation of military vehicles demonstrate that any notion, of federal military supremacy over the violation of state traffic regulations while a military vehicle is being driven off military property on a public highway and not involved in an emergency military situation has been waived.

Part 634 of the Federal Regulations governing the Department of the Army, DOD, establish rules regarding Motor Vehicle Traffic Supervision (Motor Vehicle Regulation). 32 C.F.R. §§ 634.1-54 (1991). Subpart B, Section 634.6 of the Motor Vehicle Regulation, deals with driving privileges and provides that a person who has been given the privilege of operating a government military vehicle must possess and produce on demand to law enforcement personnel “[a] valid State, overseas command, host nation, or international driver’s license and/or OF 346 (U.S. Government Motor Vehicle Operator’s Identification Card), as applicable, supported by a DD Form 2A (U.S. Armed Forces Identification Card).” 32 C.F.R. § 634.6(a)(3)(ii) (1991). (Emphasis added.)3

Subpart D, Section IV of the Motor Vehicle Regulation deals with Off-Installation Traffic Activities, with Section 634.41 providing that:

In areas not under military control, civil authorities enforce traffic laws. Law enforcement authorities will establish a system to exchange information with civil authorities. ... Procedures should be established to process reports received from civil authorities on serious traffic violar [386]*386tions, accidents, and intoxicated driving incidents involving persons subject to this regulation.

32 C.F.R. § 634.41 (1991). (Emphasis added.)

Moreover, Section 634.42 of the Motor Vehicle Regulation provides that:

(a) Installation commanders will inform service members and DOD civilian employees

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Cern
604 A.2d 1135 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1992)
Hewitt v. Commonwealth
541 A.2d 1183 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1988)
Commonwealth v. Gamarino
445 A.2d 189 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1982)
Jenkins v. Commonwealth
452 A.2d 1121 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1982)
Swift v. Commonwealth
550 A.2d 272 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
615 A.2d 967, 150 Pa. Commw. 380, 1992 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-becraft-pacommwct-1992.