from the Judgment of Sentence July 3, 2017 In the Court of
Common Pleas of York County Criminal Division at No(s):
BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., LAZARUS, J., and OTT, J.
Lee Thran appeals from the judgment of sentence imposed on
July 3, 2017, in the Court of Common Pleas of York County,
following his conviction at a bench trial on four counts of
driving under the influence (DUI). In this timely appeal, Thran
argues the trial court erred in failing to suppress the
physical evidence. Thran asserts said evidence was improperly
obtained after he was subjected to an investigative detention
that was not supported by a reasonable suspicion of criminal
activity. After a thorough review of the submissions by the
parties, relevant law, and the certified record, we affirm.
underlying facts of this matter are taken from the trial
court opinion dated September 29, 2017 and the notes of
testimony of the suppression hearing held on February 17,
On September 17, 2016, Northern York County Regional Police
Officer (NYCRP) Patrick McBreen was working the night shift.
N.T. at 5-6.
At 2304 hours (11:04 p.m.), a call was made to York County
Control from a named citizen (Justin
Baugherman). The call was dispatched to the Officer and
the following information was obtained from the caller:
. Mr. Baugherman observed a male riding a
black Harley Davidson motorcycle; and
. The male was wearing a black leather
. The motorcycle was swerving all over the
road and passing over the white line; and
. The motorcycle was traveling north on
Orchard Road, made a right onto Lincoln Highway, and pulled
into Hartlob's Garage at the corner of Orchard Road and
Lincoln Highway on Rt. 30; and
. Mr. Baugherman made the call to 911
because he was concerned for the individual's safety.
The Officer arrived at the location provided by the caller
(Hartlob's Garage) only eight (8) minutes after receiving
the call. The Officer observed a black Harley Davidson
motorcycle, and a male wearing a black leather jacket leaning
on the motorcycle. Hence, the location given in the call, the
description of the vehicle, and the description of what the
individual was wearing were all corroborated. The Officer
further testified that he had a duty to investigate and
therefore approached [the driver of the vehicle]. Officer
McBreen could not recall whether he had activated his
overhead lights, but he indicated they may have been on.
Trial Court Opinion at 2-3 (citations to N.T. omitted).
further note that Officer McBreen testified the garage was
closed and there were no other cars around at time of ...