From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...
Commonwealth v. Livingstone
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
174 A.3d 609 (2017)
Victoria Livingstone (defendant) was pulled over on the side of the interstate, entering an address into her car’s navigation system. Livingstone left the car running and had not activated the car’s hazard lights. Pennsylvania state trooper Jeremy Frantz saw the car, activated his emergency lights, pulled up, and asked Livingstone through the open passenger-side window whether she was alright. At a later suppression hearing, Frantz testified that Livingstone’s eyes appeared glossy, and she looked through him. Livingstone replied that she was alright and that she was traveling to New York. Frantz parked in front of Livingstone. A second trooper arrived and parked behind Livingstone. Frantz came to Livingstone’s window, requested her driver’s license, and asked whether she had been drinking. Livingstone said that she had not been drinking but wanted to after she arrived in New York. Livingstone said she had been driving for 90 minutes after a long workday. Livingstone repeated herself during the conversation. Frantz asked Livingstone to get out of the car for a field sobriety test. Livingstone broke down crying. A portable breathalyzer test showed that Livingstone had alcohol in her system. Livingstone was arrested. A later blood test showed that Livingstone’s blood-alcohol level was .205 percent. The state of Pennsylvania (plaintiff) charged Livingstone with driving under the influence. Livingstone moved to suppress the blood-test results, arguing that Frantz’s stop was investigative and unsupported by reasonable suspicion. The trial court denied the motion, and Livingstone was convicted. Livingstone appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Todd, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Donohue, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Baer, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.