Court Opinion

ID: 9756656
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 21:45:35.975893+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:57:01.980256
License: Public Domain

WIEAND, Judge,
concurring:
I concur in the result. In my judgment, the evidence was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that, when *42appellant drove a motor vehicle, his operating privileges were under suspension because of a conviction for driving while under the influence of alcohol and that he had actual knowledge of such suspension.
Because of the mischief which is being caused in these cases by the decision in Commonwealth v. Kane, 460 Pa. 582, 333 A.2d 925 (1975), I would urge that the holding thereof might be reconsidered by the Supreme Court. If notice of suspension is sent, postage prepaid, to the motorist at his or her correct address, I can think of no good reason for holding that the well established inference of receipt thereof should not constitute prima facie evidence that notice of the suspension has been received.