Robert Lee Stasa v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing

Summary

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania reversed an order sustaining Robert Lee Stasa’s appeal from a one-year suspension of his operating privilege for refusing chemical testing. The court held that failure to provide a sufficient breath sample constitutes a refusal under Pennsylvania law, and that whether conduct constitutes a refusal is a legal question based on the trial court’s factual findings. Because Stasa provided insufficient breath samples and offered no competent medical evidence explaining his inability to complete the test, the court reinstated the suspension.

Holdings

1. A licensee's failure to provide a sufficient breath sample constitutes a refusal to submit to chemical testing, even when the licensee makes a good-faith attempt to comply.
2. Whether a licensee's conduct constitutes a refusal is a legal question based on the facts found by the trial court, not a factual question for the trial court to decide as a legal characterization.
3. The Department met its burden to establish the statutory requirements for suspension, and Stasa failed to meet his shifted burden to prove that he was physically incapable of completing the test or that his conduct was not knowing and conscious.

Questions Presented

1. Whether failure to provide a sufficient breath sample constitutes a refusal to submit to chemical testing under Section 1547(b)(1)(i) of the Vehicle Code.
2. Whether the trial court erred by treating refusal as a factual question and finding that Stasa's inadequate first sample was merely an inability to perform the test.
3. Whether the Department met its burden to establish the elements necessary to suspend Stasa's operating privilege.

Disposition

reversed