Wally_in_Cincy
09-23-2004, 06:47 AM
<font color="blue">Good news for Barbara and dg-in-central-pa </font color>
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-09232004-370399.html
State Supreme Court says horse riders can't be "drunken drivers"
By JOE MANDAK
The Associated Press
PITTSBURGH - Pennsylvania's drunken driving law is unconstitutionally vague and can't be enforced - at least against those on horseback, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
Justice Russell M. Nigro penned the majority opinion that stems from charges filed against two men in Mercer County in 2002.
Keith Travis, 41, of Grove City, and Richard Noel, 49, of Sandy Lake, were charged with drunken driving along with a man driving a pickup who allegedly rear-ended the horse Travis was riding away from a bar on a dark country road.
Noel, Travis and the pickup truck driver all failed field sobriety tests, police said, but a Mercer County judge threw out the charges against Noel and Travis after they argued that the word "vehicles" in the state's drunken-driving law doesn't apply to horses.
..................
Eakin, who is fond of writing rhyming opinions, summed up his dissent with two stanzas mimicking the theme song of television's "Mister Ed" - a 60s sitcom about a talking horse:
"A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
but the Vehicle Code does not divorce
its application from, perforce,
a steed as my colleagues said.
"'It's not vague,' I'll say until I'm hoarse,
and whether a car, a truck or horse
this law applies with equal force,
and I'd reverse instead."
<font color="blue">In the late 50's in Livingston KY, my grandpa got drunk and rode his horse "Nell" into town and into The Restaurant (It did not have a name, it was just called "The Restaurant").
I don't remember if he got arrested. </font color>
http://www.phillyburbs.com/pb-dyn/news/103-09232004-370399.html
State Supreme Court says horse riders can't be "drunken drivers"
By JOE MANDAK
The Associated Press
PITTSBURGH - Pennsylvania's drunken driving law is unconstitutionally vague and can't be enforced - at least against those on horseback, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.
Justice Russell M. Nigro penned the majority opinion that stems from charges filed against two men in Mercer County in 2002.
Keith Travis, 41, of Grove City, and Richard Noel, 49, of Sandy Lake, were charged with drunken driving along with a man driving a pickup who allegedly rear-ended the horse Travis was riding away from a bar on a dark country road.
Noel, Travis and the pickup truck driver all failed field sobriety tests, police said, but a Mercer County judge threw out the charges against Noel and Travis after they argued that the word "vehicles" in the state's drunken-driving law doesn't apply to horses.
..................
Eakin, who is fond of writing rhyming opinions, summed up his dissent with two stanzas mimicking the theme song of television's "Mister Ed" - a 60s sitcom about a talking horse:
"A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
but the Vehicle Code does not divorce
its application from, perforce,
a steed as my colleagues said.
"'It's not vague,' I'll say until I'm hoarse,
and whether a car, a truck or horse
this law applies with equal force,
and I'd reverse instead."
<font color="blue">In the late 50's in Livingston KY, my grandpa got drunk and rode his horse "Nell" into town and into The Restaurant (It did not have a name, it was just called "The Restaurant").
I don't remember if he got arrested. </font color>