Pennsylvania DUI Attorney
Actual Physical Control of a Motor Vehicle
In determining whether an officer had reasonable grounds to believe that a motorist was in "actual physical control" of a vehicle, the court must consider the totality of the circumstances, including the location of the vehicle, whether the engine was running and whether there was other evidence indicating that the motorist had driven the vehicle at some point prior to the arrival of the police. Commonwealth v. Wolen, 546 Pa. 448, 450, 685 A.2d 1384, 1385 (1996).
In Department of Transportation, Bureau of Driver Licensing v. Paige, 156 Pa.Cmwlth. 600, 628 A.2d 917 (1993), actual physical control was found where the licensee was asleep, slumped over the steering wheel with the key in the ignition. The vehicle was parked on a city street with its parking lights on.
The term "operate" requires evidence of actual physical control of the vehicle to be determined based upon the totality of the circumstances. Commonwealth v. Anthony B. Williams, 871 A.2d 254, 259 (Pa.Super.2005). "Our precedent indicates that a combination of the following factors is required in determining whether a person had 'actual physical control' of an automobile: the motor running, the location of the vehicle, and additional evidence showing that the defendant had driven the vehicle." Id. (quoting Commonwealth v. Woodruff, 447 Pa.Super. 222, 668 A.2d 1158, 1161 (1995)).
The Commonwealth can establish that a defendant had "actual physical control" of a vehicle through wholly circumstantial evidence. Commonwealth v. Anthony B. Williams, 871 A.2d 254, 259 (Pa.Super.2005). See also Commonwealth v. Johnson, 833 A.2d 260 (Pa.Super.2003).