holding that a bicycle “clearly f[e]ll[] within the confines of [the] definition” set forth in Section 102 of the Motor Vehicle Code
How later courts described this case
- holding that a bicycle “clearly f[e]ll[] within the confines of [the] definition” set forth in Section 102 of the Motor Vehicle Code
- reversing dismissal of DUI charges against bicycle rider because a bicycle is a vehicle under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 102, and refusing to consult legislative history to define “vehicle” because there is no ambiguity in the statutory definition
- bicycle is a “vehicle” under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3731, which proscribes persons from driving vehicles while under the influence of alcohol which renders him incapable of safe driving
- “[a] bicycle is clearly not a motor vehicle as it is a vehicle “which is propelled solely by human power.’ ”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DEL SOLE, Judge,
concurring.
I join the opinion of my distinguished colleague, Judge Cercone. I only wish to point out that the Vehicle Code evidences the Legislature’s understanding that the word “vehicle” does include bicycles.
*269 At 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1101, all vehicles are required to be titled except those exempted in § 1102. There, in subparagraph 7, vehicles “moved solely by human or animal power” are excluded from this requirement. This same limitation also applies to the registration requirements of § 1301 et. sec. These sections demonstrate to me that the members of the General Assembly fully understood that bicycles were included in the definition of “vehicle” when used in § 3731.