Connoquenessing Twp. bicyclist appeal returns to Superior Court
A Connoquenessing Township man’s five-year legal battle to ride his bicycle on the road without having to pull over for faster moving motor vehicles has reached the state’s highest court.
Brendan A. Linton’s appeal of his conviction of a summary offense of impeding traffic was granted by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which remanded the case to Superior Court.
State police charged Linton, 30, with two summary Traffic Code violations and a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct after July 31, 2021, traffic stop.
According to an affidavit, a trooper encountered traffic traveling slowly at 12 to 25 mph westbound on Evans City Road near Whitestown Road at 10:20 a.m. Some vehicles passed a pedal cycle that was traveling in the westbound lane. The trooper noted a 7-to-8-foot wide paved shoulder is available throughout the area.
The trooper said he pulled over the cyclist and explained the Minimum Speed Regulation, section 3364 of the Vehicle Code, and safety hazards to motorists caused by not using the shoulder when motor vehicles are attempting to overtake pedal cycles were the reasons for the traffic stop.
The cyclist, later identified as Linton, said he didn’t have to provide the trooper with identification because he didn’t commit an offense, but then told the trooper he wasn’t carrying identification, according to the affidavit.
State police have received complaints from motorists about a pedal cycle impeding traffic on Evans City Road, and had previous contact with Linton. Using the state’s JNET computer technology, the trooper said he identified Linton as the cyclist and told him he will receive a summons in the mail. Linton responded, “OK, keep ‘em coming,” according to the affidavit.
The trooper also noted records indicate police had four previous interactions with Linton for the same reason.
The charges were held for Common Pleas Court at an October 2021 preliminary hearing. At non-jury trial in May 2022, Linton was found guilty of one summary citation for violating the Minimum Speed Regulation in the code that states a pedal cycle may be operated at a safe and reasonable speed appropriate for the pedal cycle. A pedal cycle operator shall use reasonable efforts so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.
Judge Timothy McCune found Linton not guilty of the other summary violation of refusing to identify himself, and the disorderly conduct charge, which was reduced to a summary violation, but was found guilty of the pedal cycle citation.
In June 2022, Linton appealed the conviction to Superior Court, which affirmed the guilty verdict.
“Superior Court affirmed bicyclists must get off the road when traffic approaches,” said Linton’s attorney Corrie Woods.
The Supreme Court in April 2024 granted his petition to file an appeal. The high court justices accepted the appeal because it involves a matter of statewide importance, Woods said.
Briefs and arguments from Woods and prosecutors were filed through October 2024 before the justices issued a ruling June 17 reversing the Superior court ruling and remanding the case for reconsideration.
“The Supreme Court split the difference — bikes sometimes have to leave the road,” Woods said.
He further summarized the decision about bicycles pulling off the road by saying “not always and not never” and “there is a duty to share the road.”
The majority decision from the justices says the Vehicle Code provides that “[e]very person riding a pedal cycle upon a road shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle.
“On the one hand, it grants pedal cyclists a right to operate on any highway at a safe and reasonable speed for the pedal cycle. On the other, it imposes a duty on pedal cycle operators to use reasonable efforts so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. We hold this duty may, under certain circumstances, require the pedal cycle operator to leave the road to allow faster moving vehicles to pass.
“However, it does not mandate a pedal cycle must always and immediately vacate the road for other vehicles. The question that remains is when does a pedal cycle operator have a duty to leave the road to avoid impeding the normal and reasonable movement of traffic? In some cases, the circumstances might require a pedal cyclist to temporarily but completely exit the road to allow traffic to pass. In others, it may not be safe or reasonable to expect a pedal cyclist to do so, or at least not right away. And in others still, a pedal cyclist may only need to move to the right side of the lane.”
Superior Court hasn’t issued an order on how the case will move forward, but Woods said he believes the panel of judges will base their decision on the existing records from Common Pleas Court and past arguments. The Superior Court ruling can be appealed to the Supreme Court again, he said.
“I hope it doesn’t come to that,” Woods said. The case has been one of the most challenging in his career, he added.
Woods suggested urban planners should take note of the case and keep bicyclists in mind when planning communities.
While that case is pending in Superior Court, Linton is facing the same three charges in Common Pleas Court from a similar Oct. 25, 2022, incident when he was riding his bike on the section of Evans City Road in Butler Township. The affidavit state police filed is similar to the 2021 traffic stop.
