Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County, in case of In the Matter of the Suspension of Operating Privileges of Terry Bruce Kroh, No. 1484-A of 1970. Appeal transferred from the Superior Court of Pennsylvania to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, February 26, 1971.
Eugene J. Brew, Jr., with him Dale and Brew, for appellant.
Anthony J. Maiorana, Assistant Attorney General, with him Robert W. Cunliffe, Deputy Attorney General, and J. Shane Creamer, Attorney General, for appellee.
Judges Kramer, Mencer and Rogers, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Mencer.
This case involves an appeal by Terry Bruce Kroh (Kroh) from an order of the court below affirming an order of suspension of Kroh's license by the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary).
Kroh was convicted of speeding on May 24, 1968. This offense occurred on May 13, 1968, at which time Kroh was under the age of 18 and possessed a junior operator's license. Previous to this offense, Kroh had been suspended by the Secretary on two other occasions, once for driving too fast for conditions, and once for failure to give proper signals. On June 24, 1970, after a departmental hearing on April 3, 1970, Kroh's license was suspended for an eight-month period pursuant to Section 604.1(a) and (d) of The Vehicle Code, Act of April 29, 1959, P.L. 58, as amended, 75 P.S. § 604.1(a) and (d). Kroh was 19 years of age at the time of the suspension and possessed a regular operator's license (Kroh became 18 on December 14, 1968).
Counsel for Kroh concedes that the Secretary may suspend a regular operator's license for an offense which occurred before the operator's eighteenth birthday while the operator held a junior operator's license.
aside the action of the secretary." Heller Motor Vehicle Operator License Case, 196 Pa. Superior Ct. 340, 343, 175 A.2d 305, 306 (1961) (delay of 21 months); see also Angelicchio Motor Vehicle Operator License Case, 213 Pa. Super. Ct. 409, 249 A.2d 788 (1968) (delay of 18 months); Criswell Motor Vehicle Operator License Case, supra (delay of 16 months). Thus, administrative delays, standing alone, will not void an order of suspension, particularly where, as here (but not in Kaufman), there is no showing of prejudice. Kroh has averred that he will be considerably inconvenienced by this suspension, but this simply is not sufficient justification, even coupled with administrative delay, to set aside the action of the Secretary.