Commonwealth v. Doyle

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that reasonable grounds existed where a police officer testified that a motorist was involved in an accident and had a strong odor of alcohol on his breath
• holding that reasonable grounds existed where a police officer testified that a motorist was involved in an accident and had a strong odor of alcohol on his breath
• “[I]nvolvement in an accident, combined with the strong odor of alcohol on his breath, are circumstances under which a reasonable person could conclude that [a licensee] was operating the vehicle under the influence of alcohol.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. Berta
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-10-24· cited 18×
• Mooney v. Commonwealth, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1994-12-29· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Webster
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-02-25· cited 6×
• Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. Grippo
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-12-03· cited 4×
• Kubit v. Commonwealth
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-07-28· cited 2×
• Commonwealth, Department of Transportation v. Firestone
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-12-07· cited 1×