Frequently, Chester County DUI's start with a police stop for a violation of § 3309, Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Essentially, this is frequently a "catch-all" for stopping a person who is allegedly swerving, crossing a traffic line, etc.
Having a video in this case is always helpful to your Chester County DUI lawyer in terms of getting the stop suppressed if the cop or trooper exaggerates the violation.
In Commonwealth V. Bostick out of Monroe County, it was held that probable cause existed to stop a vehicle for the violation of 75-3309 after the trooper received reports of the defendant's erratic driving, the troopers observed the car swerving within its lane, and traveling at a slow spped and almost striking construction signs.
A very important case is Commonwealth v. Feczko. This is a Superior Court case. Defendant challenged the legality of the traffic stop of his vehicle. The appeals court found that traffic stops based on a reasonable suspicion either of criminal activity or a violation of the Motor Vehicle Code under the authority of 75 Pa.C.S. § 6308 had to serve a stated investigatory purpose. Defendant claimed that the suppression court erred in denying his motion to suppress challenging the basis of the traffic stop. Based on the record of the suppression hearing, the appeals court concluded that the trooper was able to articulate specific facts possessed by her at the time of the questioned stop that provided probable cause to believe defendant was in violation of 75 Pa.C.S. § 3309(1). The suppression court viewed a video recording from the trooper's patrol car and observed numerous touchings of the white fog line by defendant's vehicle and clearly saw the vehicle cross over the center yellow line while negotiating a curve. Given the presence of oncoming traffic, defendant's deviations from his lane of travel created a significant safety hazard. The traffic stop of defendant vehicle was legal. Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress.
In addition, in Pa. v. Anderson from 2007, the court ruled that as the defendant in the case failed to keep his vehicle within the confines of his own lane, he veered beyond his own lane while attempting to correct his position, and he was speeding, a police officer had a reasonable suspicion that defendant had violated various provisions of the Pennsylvania Vehicle Code, including 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 3301(a), 3307(b), and 3309(1), such that the officer's stop of defendant's vehicle was reasonable and lawful under 75 Pa.C.S. § 6308(b).