# Commonwealth v. Uhrinek

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · July 28, 1988 · 518 Pa. 532

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9732286

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. John D. UHRINEK, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 28, 1988
- **Citations:** 518 Pa. 532; 544 A.2d 947; 1988 Pa. LEXIS 190
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Larsen
- **Judges:** Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Zappala, Papadakos, Stout
- **Cited by:** 23 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9732286

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that - 23 - J-S40029-23 evidence of a victim’s intoxication is admissible where it is relevant to whether the decedent, who might have been intoxicated, jaywalked into the path of the defendant’s vehicle
- discussing causation in the criminal context

## Opinion text

LARSEN, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent.
*543 Evidence regarding the intoxication of a victim should never be relevant when a defendant is charged with homicide by vehicle. 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3732. It is the behavior of a victim which is of relevance to the element of causation, and the behavior of the victim in this case was fully presented to the jury. What motivates such behavior, however, is entirely irrelevant. I do not believe that a driver who kills a pedestrian, who may be intoxicated, while that driver operates his or her vehicle in a manner which violates the Motor Vehicle Code, is any less culpable than a driver who kills a pedestrian suddenly stricken by an epileptic seizure.
Accordingly, I would affirm the order of Superior Court, affirming the judgment of sentence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9732286. Public record. Not legal advice.