Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County, in the case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Dawn D. Gretz, No. 86-4149-15-6.
Harold H. Cramer, Assistant Counsel, with him, John L. Heaton, Chief Counsel, for appellant.
Richard S. Wasserbly, for appellee.
Judges MacPhail, Barry, and Senior Judge Barbieri, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge MacPhail.
[ 114 Pa. Commw. Page 288]
The Department of Transporation, Bureau of Driver Licensing (DOT), has appealed from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County which reduced the twelve (12) month suspension of Dawn Gretz's (Appellee) driving privilege imposed pursuant to Section 1532(b)(3) of the Vehicle Code (Code), as amended, 75 Pa. C. S. § 1532(b)(3), to six (6) months by giving Appellee credit for time served under the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition Program (ARD). We reverse.
Appellee was arrested and convicted in Chester County of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance on May 2,
[ 114 Pa. Commw. Page 2891984]
, pursuant to Section 3731 of the Code, as amended , 75 Pa. C. S. § 3731. She was then accepted into the ARD program in that county and her driving privilege was suspended for six (6) months by the trial judge, pursuant to Section 3731(e)(6)(ii) of the Code, as amended, 75 Pa. C. S. § 3731(e)(6)(ii).
On January 17, 1985, Appellee was again arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance in violation of the conditions of her ARD and of the Code. She was convicted and removed from the ARD program, and consequently, had her driving privilege suspended by DOT for twelve (12) months pursuant to Section 1532(b)(3) of the Code. The trial judge in Bucks County denied Appellee's petition for appeal from the order of DOT's suspension of her driving privilege, but gave Appellee credit for the six (6) months served under the ARD program, thus reducing DOT's twelve-month suspension of Appellee's driving privilege to six (6) months.
First, we must consider whether DOT waived the issue of the trial court's authority to grant credit for time served when Appellee's driving privilege was suspended. In her brief, Appellee alleged that DOT waived this issue because the issue was raised for the first time on appeal. This, of course, is a statutory appeal where the provisions of Pa. R.C.P. No. 227.1 (post trial motions) are inapplicable. We have held that in statutory appeals "[a]n issue" is a disputed point or question on which parties to an action desire the court to decide, that the "Order" is the decision of the court on the "issue," that when one "objects" to the decision of a court, one appeals the decision and that there is no requirement that a party object to the trial court's order before appealing from it. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board v. Willow Grove Veterans Home Association, Inc., 97 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 391, 509 A.2d 958 (1986). In this case,
[ 114 Pa. Commw. Page 290]
DOT is appealing the "decision" of the Court of Common Pleas ...