Court Opinion

ID: 9746263
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 14:10:11.920266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:11.304260
License: Public Domain

ZAPPALA, Justice,
dissenting.
Under the circumstances of this particular case, I must respectfully dissent. At the conclusion of the suppression *492hearing, the Honorable Paul H. Millin, P.J., concluded that Sergeant Christopher Roofner of the Tidioute Borough Police Department, dressed in full police uniform and arriving in a marked police vehicle at the scene of an accident outside of his jurisdiction, was acting under “color of law” when he subjected Appellee, Leslie E. Mendenhall, to an investigative detention.
The majority has failed to accord proper deference to the suppression court’s decision, which came after weighing the testimony of Sergeant Roofner, Pennsylvania State Police Trooper Daniel Moore and Appellee. I find the factual findings of the suppression court are supported by the record, and the legal conclusions drawn therefrom are correct. Even though the majority may disagree with the findings, it is not our prerogative to come to a different conclusion unless there has been a clear error of law. None having been shown, I would therefore affirm the order of the Superior Court.