Commonwealth v. Smith
Pennsylvania Superior Court
831 A.2d 636 (2003)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
A police officer observed Karen Smith (defendant) as she drove her truck into an oncoming lane and continued in the wrong lane for one-tenth of a mile. The police officer activated his emergency lights, pulled Smith over to the side of the road, and asked her to exit the truck. Smith attempted to comply, but stumbled and staggered her way out of the truck. The police officer noticed that Smith’s eyes were glassy, that she was slurring her speech, and that she emanated a strong odor of alcohol. Smith admitted to consuming several beers earlier in the evening. The police officer administered three sobriety tests, all of which Smith failed. Smith was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) and was transported to the hospital for a blood-alcohol test. At a bench trial on the DUI charge, Smith testified that she drank beer while wearing a prescribed duragesic patch that administered narcotic medicine for pain. Smith admitted to not reading the patch’s directions or the fine print related to warnings about its use. No other testimony was provided. Smith was convicted on the DUI charge. Smith appealed, arguing that the evidence was sufficient to raise a defense of involuntary intoxication.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Melvin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.