[30 Pa.B. 1477]
[Continued from previous Web Page] Rule 645. Seating and Discharge of Alternate Jurors.
(A) Alternate jurors, in the order in which they are called, shall replace principal jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties.
(B) An alternate juror who does not replace a principal juror shall be discharged before the jury retires to consider its verdict.
Comment This rule is derived from the last two sentences of former Rule 1108(a). See Rule 633 for the procedures for the examination and challenges of alternate trial jurors.
Official Note: New Rule 645 adopted March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the reorganization and renumbering of the rules and the provisions of Rule 645 published at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
[This is an amalgamated rule, combining former Rules 39, 159, 340, 1415, and 2020.] Rule 1101. Suspension of Acts of Assembly.
This rule provides for the suspension of the following Acts of Assembly:
(1) The Act of June 15, 1994, P. L. 273, No. 45, § 1, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139, which provides, inter alia, that any punishment imposed for contempt will be ''automatically stayed for a period of 10 days from the date of the imposition of the punishment during which time an appeal of the action'' of a district justice, a Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judge, or a Philadelphia Traffic Court judge ''may be filed with the court of common pleas of the judicial district,'' and which is implemented by Rules 140, 141, and 142, is suspended only insofar as the Act is inconsistent with the 30-day appeal period and 30-day automatic stay period set forth in Rule 141.
(2) The Act of April 29, 1959, P. L. 58, § 1209, 75 P. S. § 1209, repealed by Act of June 17, 1976, P. L. 162, No. 81, § 7 and replaced by Sections 6322, 6323, 6324, and 6325 of the Vehicle Code (75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6322-6325), are suspended insofar as these sections are inconsistent with Rule 470.
(3) The Act of July 1, 1987, P. L. 180, No. 21, § 2, 42 Pa.C.S. § 1520, is suspended insofar as the Act is inconsistent with Rules 300, 301, 302, and Rules 310 through 320.
(4) The Public Defender Act, Act of December 2, 1968, P. L. 1144, No. 358, § 1 et seq. as amended through Act of December 10, 1974, P. L. 830, No. 277, § 1, 16 P. S. § 9960.1 et seq., is suspended only insofar as the Act is inconsistent with Rule 122.
(5) Section 5720 of the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, Act of October 4, 1978, P. L. 831, No. 164, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5720, is suspended as inconsistent with Rule 573 only insofar as the section may delay disclosure to a defendant seeking discovery under Rule 573(B)(1)(g); and Section 5721(b) of the Act, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5721(b), is suspended only insofar as the time frame for making a motion to suppress is concerned, as inconsistent with Rules 579 and 581.
(6) Sections 9731, 9732, 9733, 9734, 9735, 9736, 9751, 9752, and 9759 of the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 9731, 9732, 9733, 9734, 9735, 9736, 9751, 9752, and 9759 are suspended as being inconsistent with the rules of Chapter 7.
(7) The Act of November 21, 1990, P. L. 588, No. 138, § 1, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8934, which authorizes the sealing of search warrant affidavits, and which is implemented by Rule 211, is suspended only insofar as the Act is inconsistent with Rules 205, 206, and 211.
Comment This rule is derived from former Rules 39, 159, 340, 1415, and 2020, the rules previously providing for the suspension of legislation.
Official Note: Former Rule 39 adopted October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101. Former Rule 159 adopted September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended February 1, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended April 10, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended January 31, 1991, effective July 1, 1991; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101. Former Rule 340 combined previous Rules 321 and 322, which were the prior suspension rules, and was adopted June 29, 1977, effective September 1, 1977; amended April 24, 1981, effective June 1, 1981; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101. Former Rule 1415 adopted July 23, 1973, effective 90 days hence; paragraph (g) added March 21, 1975, effective March 31, 1975; amended August 14, 1995, effective January 1, 1996; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101. Former Rule 2020 adopted September 3, 1993, effective January 1, 1994; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101. New Rule 1101 adopted March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
FORMER RULE 39:
Final Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 39 published with the Court's Order at 27 Pa.B. 5401 (October 18, 1997).
FORMER RULE 159:
Report explaining the January 31, 1991 amendments to former Rule 159 published at 20 Pa.B. 4788 (September 15, 1990); Supplemental Report published at 21 Pa.B. 621 (February 16, 1991).
FORMER RULE 1415:
Final Report explaining the August 14, 1995 amendments to former Rule 1415 published with the Court's Order at 25 Pa.B. 3472 (August 26, 1995).
FORMER RULE 2020:
Report explaining the provisions of former Rule 2020 published at 21 Pa.B. 3681 (August 17, 1991).
NEW RULE 1101:
Final Report explaining the reorganization and renumbering of the rules and the provisions of Rule 1101 published at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
PART III. TEXT OF AMENDED OR RESCINDED RULES Rule 27. [Publicity and Recording of Proceedings] (Rescinded).
[(a) During a hearing or summary trial, the issuing authority shall:
(1) Prohibit the taking of photographs and motion pictures of the proceedings or in the hearing room during the proceedings and the transmission of communications by telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, in or from the hearing room; and
(2) Prohibit the mechanical recording of the proceedings by anyone for any purpose, provided that the issuing authority, the attorney for the Commonwealth, or the defendant, may cause such a recording to be made as an aid to the preparation of the written record for subsequent use in a case, but such recordings shall not be publicly played or disseminated in any manner unless in a court during a trial or hearing.
(b) If it appears to the court that a violation of paragraph (a) has resulted in substantial prejudice to the defendant, the court, upon application by the attorney for the Commonwealth or the defendant, may:
(1) Quash the proceedings at the preliminary hearing and order another preliminary hearing to be held before the same issuing authority at a subsequent time without additional costs being taxed therefor;
(2) Discharge the defendant on nominal bail if in custody, or continue his bail if at liberty, pending further proceedings;
(3) Order all costs of the issuing authority forfeited in the original proceedings; and
(4) Adopt any, all, or combination of the remedies herein established as the nature of the case shall require in the interests of justice.
Comment ''Recording'' as used in this rule is not intended to preclude the use of recording devices for the preservation of testimony as permitted by Rules 9015 and 9015A.]
Official Note: Formerly Rule 143, adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; renumbered Rule 27 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended February 15, 1974, effective immediately; Comment revised March 22, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended June 19, 1996, effective July 1, 1996; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 112.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the June 19, 1996 amendments published with the Court's Order at 26 Pa.B. 3128 (July 6, 1996).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 39. [Suspension of Acts of Assembly--Chapter 30] (Rescinded).
[The Act of June 15, 1994, P. L. 273, No. 45, § 1, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139, which provides, inter alia, that any punishment imposed for contempt will be ''automatically stayed for a period of 10 days from the date of the imposition of the punishment during which time an appeal of the action'' of a district justice, a Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judge, or a Philadelphia Traffic Court judge ''may be filed with the court of common pleas of the judicial district,'' and which is implemented by Rules 30, 31, and 32, is hereby suspended only insofar as it is inconsistent with the 30-day appeal period and 30-day automatic stay period set forth in Rule 31.]
Official Note: Rule 39 [Adopted] adopted October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 1101.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 39 published with the Court's Order at 27 Pa.B. 5405 (October 18, 1997).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule [51] 400. Means of Instituting Proceedings in Summary Cases.
Criminal proceedings in summary cases shall be instituted either by:
[(a)] (1) issuing a citation to the defendant; or
[(b)] (2) filing a citation; or
[(c)] (3) filing a complaint; or
[(d)] (4) arresting without a warrant when arrest is specifically authorized by law.
Comment This rule establishes the means of instituting criminal proceedings in summary cases. For general citation procedures, see Chapter 4 Part [II] B, Rules [52 and 53] 402 and 403.
For the procedures when a citation is issued to a defendant pursuant to paragraph [(a)] (1) of this rule, see Chapter 4 Part [IIA] B(1), Rules [55, 56, 57, 58, 59] 405, 406, 407, 408, and 409.
For the procedures when a citation is filed pursuant to paragraph [(b)] (2), see Chapter 4 Part [IIB] B(2), Rules [60, 61, 62, 63, 64] 410, 411, 412, 413, and 414.
For the procedures when a complaint is filed pursuant to paragraph [(c)] (3), see Chapter 4 Part [III] C, Rules [65, 66, 67, 68, 69] 420, 421, 422, 423, and 424.
For the procedures when there is an arrest without a warrant pursuant to paragraph [(d)] (4) see Chapter 4 Part [IV] D(2), Rules [70, 71] 440 and 441.
For the procedures regarding the use of arrest warrants in summary cases, see Chapter 4 Part [V] D(1), Rules [75, 76] 430 and 431.
For general procedures applicable in all summary cases, see Chapter 4 Part [VI] E, Rules [80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 90] 451, 452, 453, 454, 455, 456, 457, 458.
For the procedures for appealing to the court of common pleas for a trial de novo, see Chapter 4, Part F, Rules 460, 461, and 462.
For the procedures in summary cases charging parking violations, see Chapter 4 Part [VII] A, Rule [95] 401. Although a criminal proceeding may be instituted in these cases by issuing a citation either by handing it to a defendant or placing it on a vehicle windshield, it is expected that many parking cases will be disposed of without a criminal proceeding under these rules. A parking ticket, which is not a citation, is used by a political subdivision and the defendant pays the amount specified on the ticket within the time specified.
Summary cases are cases in which all the offenses charged are either summary offenses, as defined in the Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C.S. § 106(c), or violations of ordinances for which imprisonment may be imposed upon conviction or upon failure to pay a fine or penalty. See Rule [3] 103. Criminal proceedings in summary cases are to be brought under this chapter of the rules. If one or more of the offenses charged is a misdemeanor, felony, or murder, the case is a court case (see Rule [3] 103) and proceeds under Chapter [100] 5 of the rules. Any summary offenses in such a case, if known at the time, must be charged in the same complaint as the higher offenses and must be disposed of as part of the court case. See Crimes Code § 110, 18 Pa.C.S. § 110, and Commonwealth v. Campana, 304 A.2d 432 (Pa. 1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 (1973), on remand, 314 A.2d 854 (Pa. 1974). But see Commonwealth v. Beatty, 455 A.2d 1194 (Pa. 1983); Commonwealth v. Taylor, 522 A.2d 37 (Pa. 1987); and Commonwealth v. Kresge, 464 A.2d 384 (Pa. Super. 1983) (no Section 110 violation when separate prosecutions involve offenses ''not within the jurisdiction of a single court''). See also Commonwealth v. Geyer, 687 A.2d 815 (Pa. 1996) (Section 110 applies to separate prosecution of two summary offenses within the jurisdiction of a single court).
The summary case rules are not intended to prohibit or to suspend any acknowledgment of guilt procedures that may be specifically authorized by statute. See, e.g., Section 926 of the Game and Wildlife Code, 34 Pa.C.S. § 926, and Section 925 of the Fish and Boat Code, 30 Pa.C.S. § 925. Furthermore, the use of a field acknowledgment of guilt pursuant to 34 Pa.C.S. § 926 or 30 Pa.C.S. § 925 should not be construed as the issuance of a citation for the purpose of instituting a summary case under these rules. See Rules [55 and 60] 405 and 410.
The Rules of Criminal Procedure generally do not apply to juvenile proceedings, but these rules do apply to proceedings in summary cases involving juveniles to the extent that the Juvenile Act does not apply to such proceedings. See, e.g., Juvenile Act §§ 6302-6303, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6302-6303; Vehicle Code § 6303, 75 Pa.C.S. § 6303. See also 42 Pa.C.S. § 1515(a)(1) and 6303(a)(5) concerning jurisdiction of summary offenses arising out of the same episode or transaction involving a delinquent act for which a petition alleging delinquency is filed.
See Section 1522 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 1522, concerning parental notification in certain summary cases involving juveniles.
Official Note: Previous Rule 51, adopted January 23, 1975, effective September 1, 1975; Comment revised January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; Comment revised December 15, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; rescinded July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; and replaced by present Rules [3, 51, 52, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, and 95] 103, 400, 401, 402, 405, 410, 420, 440, and 430. Present Rule 51 adopted July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986. The January 1, 1986 effective dates all are extended to July 1, 1986; Comment revised February 1, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; Comment revised January 31, 1991, effective July 1, 1991; Comment revised January 16, 1996, effective immediately; Comment revised June 6, 1997, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 400 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Report explaining the January 31, 1991 amendments published at 20 Pa.B. 4788 (September 15, 1990); Supplemental Report published at 21 Pa.B. 621 (February 16, 1991).
Report explaining the January 16, 1996 Comment revisions published with the Court's Order at 26 Pa.B. 437 (February 3, 1996).
Report explaining the June 6, 1997 Comment revision published with the Court's Order at 25 Pa.B. 2923 (June 21, 1997).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 86. [Appeals] (Rescinded).
[(A) When an appeal is authorized by law in a summary proceeding, including a prosecution for violation of a municipal ordinance which provides for imprisonment upon conviction or upon failure to pay a fine, an appeal shall be perfected by filing a notice of appeal within 30 days after the conviction or other final order from which the appeal is taken and by appearing in the court of common pleas for the trial de novo. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the clerk of courts.
(B) Stays.
(1) In all cases in which a sentence of imprisonment has been imposed, execution of sentence shall be stayed until the time for appeal expires.
(2) In any case in which a notice of appeal is filed, the execution of sentence shall be stayed.
(3) Whenever the execution of sentence is stayed pursuant to this paragraph, the issuing authority may set bail or collateral.
(C) During the 30-day appeal period, failure to pay fines and costs, or restitution, shall not be grounds for imprisonment and shall not be grounds to preclude the taking of an appeal.
(D) The notice of appeal shall contain the following information:
(1) the name and address of the appellant;
(2) the name and address of the issuing authority who heard the case;
(3) the magisterial district number where the case was heard;
(4) the name and mailing address of the affiant as shown on the complaint or citation;
(5) the date of the conviction or other final order from which the appeal is taken;
(6) the offense(s) of which convicted, if any;
(7) the sentence imposed, and if the sentence includes a fine, costs, or restitution, whether the amount due has been paid;
(8) the type or amount of bail or collateral furnished to the issuing authority, if any;
(9) the name and address of the attorney, if any, filing the notice of appeal; and
(10) except when the appeal is from a conviction, the grounds relied upon for appeal.
(E) Within 5 days after filing the notice of appeal, a copy shall be served either personally or by mail by the clerk of courts upon the issuing authority, the affiant, and the appellee or appellee's attorney, if any.
(F) The issuing authority shall, within 20 days after receipt of the notice of appeal, file with the clerk of courts:
(1) the transcript of the proceedings;
(2) the original complaint or citation;
(3) the summons or warrant of arrest, if any; and
(4) the bail bond, if any.
(G) When a defendant appeals after conviction by an issuing authority in any summary proceeding, upon the filing of the transcript and other papers by the issuing authority, the case shall be heard de novo by the appropriate division of the court of common pleas as the president judge shall direct. In appeals from summary proceedings arising under the Vehicle Code or local traffic ordinances, other than parking offenses, the law enforcement officer who observed the alleged offense must appear and testify. The failure of a law enforcement officer to appear and testify shall result in the dismissal of the charges unless:
(1) the defendant waives the presence of the law enforcement officer in open court on the record;
(2) the defendant waives the presence of the law enforcement officer by filing a written waiver signed by the defendant and defense counsel, or the defendant if proceeding pro se, with the clerk of courts; or
(3) the trial judge determines that good cause exists for the law enforcement officer's unavailability and grants a continuance.
(H) This rule shall provide the exclusive means of appealing from a summary conviction. Courts of common pleas shall not issue writs of certiorari in such cases.
(I) This rule shall not apply to appeals from contempt adjudications.
Comment This rule applies to appeals in all summary proceedings, including prosecutions for violations of municipal ordinances which provide for the possibility of imprisonment, and default hearings.
Appeals from contempt adjudications are governed by Rule 31.
The Rules of Criminal Procedure are applicable generally to these proceedings. See, e.g., Rule 3, Chapter 50 (Summary Cases), Rule 1117, and Chapter 6000. The narrow holding in City of Easton v. Marra, 326 A.2d 637 (Pa. Super. 1974), is not in conflict, since the record before the court did not indicate that imprisonment was possible under the ordinance there in question.
Under paragraph (B)(2), the stay applies to all ''sentences'' imposed after conviction, including sentences of imprisonment, fines and costs, or restitution, and sentences of imprisonment for defaults in payment pursuant to Rule 85.
When the only issues on appeal arise solely from an issuing authority's determination after a default hearing pursuant to Rule 85, the matter must be heard de novo by the appropriate judge of the court of common pleas
and only those issues arising from the default hearing are to be considered. It is not intended to reopen other issues not properly preserved for appeal. A determination after a default hearing would be a final order for purposes of these rules.
The 1999 amendment of paragraph (G), made in response to Commonwealth v. Hightower, 652 A.2d 873 (Pa. Super. 1995), permits the court to continue the case if there is good cause for the officer's unavailability.
Certiorari was abolished by former Rule 67 in 1973, pursuant to Article V Schedule Section 26 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, which specifically empowers the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to do so by rule. This Schedule section is still viable, and the substance of this Schedule section has also been included in the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 934. The abolition of certiorari, of course, continues.
Bail, when set in a summary case, must be set in accordance with the bail rules, Chapter 4000.]
Official Note: Rule 86 [Adopted] adopted July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; revised September 23, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; January 1, 1986 effective dates extended to July 1, 1986; amended February 2, 1989, effective March 1, 1989; amended March 22, 1993, effective January 1, 1994; amended October 28, 1994, effective as to cases instituted on or after January 1, 1995; amended February 27, 1995, effective July 1, 1995; amended October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; amended May 14, 1999, effective July 1, 1999; rescinded March 1, 2000 and paragraphs (A), (D), (E), (F), and (I) replaced by Rule 460, paragraphs (B) and (C) replaced by Rule 461, and paragraph (G) replaced by Rule 462, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 22, 1993 amendments published with the Court's Order at 23 Pa.B. 1699 (April 10, 1993).
Final Report explaining the October 28, 1994 amendments published with the Court's Order at 24 Pa.B. 5843 (November 26, 1994).
Final Report explaining the February 27, 1995 amendments published with the Court's Order at 25 Pa.B. 935 (March 18, 1995).
Final Report explaining the October 1, 1997 amendments published with the Court's Order at 27 Pa.B. 5408 October 18, 1997).
Final Report explaining the May 14, 1999 amendments to paragraph (G) concerning the police officer's presence published with the Court's Order at 29 Pa.B. 2776 (May 29, 1999).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 90. [Defects in Form, Content, or Procedure--Summary Cases] (Rescinded).
[A defendant shall not be discharged nor shall a case be dismissed because of a defect in the form or content of a complaint, citation, summons, or warrant, or a defect in the procedures of this Chapter, unless the defendant raises the defect before the conclusion of the summary trial and the defect is prejudicial the rights of the defendant.
Comment This rule replaces previous Rule 70.
This rule is intended to clarify when a defendant should be discharged or a case dismissed because of a defect; it eliminates disputes as to what is an informal defect or a substantive defect. As a condition of relief regardless of whether the defect is in form, content, or procedure, the court or issuing authority must determine that there is actual prejudice to the rights of the defendant.
A complaint, citation, summons, or warrant may be amended at any time so as to remedy any defect in form or content that is not prejudicial to the rights of the defendant. Nothing in this rule shall prevent the filing of a new complaint or citation and the reissuance of process. Any new complaint must be filed within the time permitted by the applicable statute of limitations.
Ordinarily, if a defendant does not raise a defect at the summary trial, the defendant cannot thereafter raise the defect as grounds for dismissal or discharge at a later stage in the proceedings. However, the intent is not to preclude a defendant from raising a defect for the first time after the summary trial when the interests of justice require it, as for example, when the defendant was not represented by counsel during the proceedings before the district justice or when the defendant could not reasonably have discovered the defect until after the conclusion of the summary trial.
Any defect properly raised under this rule shall be specifically described on the docket by the issuing authority. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 26.
If the district justice determines that a defect is prejudicial, it is intended that the decision recorded on the docket pursuant to Rule 26(b)(12) shall be discharge of the defendant or dismissal of the case, rather than not guilty.
For the comparable procedures in court case see Rule 150].
Official Note: Rule 90 [Adopted] adopted July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; rescinded March 1, 2000 and replaced by Rule 109, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 150. [Defects in Form, Content, or Procedure--Court Cases] (Rescinded).
[A defendant shall not be discharged nor shall a case be dismissed because of a defect in the form or content of a complaint, summons, or warrant, or a defect in the procedures in this Chapter, unless the defendant raises the defect before the conclusion of the preliminary hearing and the defect is prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.]
Official Note: Previous paragraph (a) (Informal Defects) formerly Rule 114 and previous paragraph (b) (Substantive Defects) formerly Rule 115, both adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; suspended January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; revised January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; combined, renumbered Rule 150, and amended September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended April 8, 1982, effective July 1, 1983[,] ; Comment revised July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; rescinded March 1, 2000 and replaced by Rule 109, effective April 1, 2001.
[Comment The 1981 amendment is intended to clarify when a defendant should be discharged or a case dismissed because of a defect; it eliminates disputes as to what is an informal defect or a substantive defect. Under this amendment, as a condition of relief regardless of whether the defect is in form, content, or procedure, the court or issuing authority must determine that there is actual prejudice to the rights of the defendant.
A complaint, summons, or warrant may be amended at any time so as to remedy any defect in form or content that is not prejudicial to the rights of the defendant. Nothing in this rule shall prevent the filing of a new complaint and the reissuance of process. Any new complaint must be filed within the time permitted by the applicable statute of limitations.
Ordinarily, if a defendant does not raise a defect before the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, the defendant cannot thereafter raise the defect as grounds for dismissal or discharge at a later state in the proceedings. See, Commonwealth v. Krall, 452 Pa. 215, 304 A.2d 488 (1973).
Any defect properly raised under this rule shall be specifically described on the docket by the issuing authority. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 26.
For the comparable procedures in summary cases see Rule 90.]
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 159. [Suspension of Acts of Assembly--Chapters 50 and 100] (Rescinded).
[The following Acts of Assembly are hereby suspended:
(a) The Act of April 29, 1959, P. L. 58, § 1209, 75 P. S. § 1209, repealed by Act of June 17, 1976, P. L. 162, No. 81, § 7 and replaced by Sections 6322, 6323, 6324, and 6325 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §§ 6322--6325 (1977), insofar as they are inconsistent with Rule 91.
(b) The Act of July 1, 1987, P. L. 180, No. 21, § 2, 42 Pa.C.S. § 1520, insofar as it is inconsistent with Rules 160, 161, 162, and Rules 175 through 186.]
Official Note: Rule 159 [Adopted] adopted September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended February 1, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended April 10, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended January 31, 1991, effective July 1, 1991; rescinded March 1, 2000 and replaced by Rule 1101, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Report explaining the January 31, 1991 amendments published at 20 Pa.B.[ull.] 4788 (September 15, 1990); Supplemental Report published at 21 Pa.B.[ull.] 621 (February 16, 1991).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule [301] 106. Continuances in Summary and Court Cases.
[(a)] (A) The court or issuing authority may, in the interests of justice, grant a continuance, [of] on its own motion, or on the motion of either party.
(B) When the matter is before an issuing authority, the issuing authority shall record on the transcript the identity of the moving party and the reasons for granting or denying the continuance. When the matter is in the court of common pleas, [The court] the judge shall on the record identify the moving party and state of record the [court's] reasons [justifying the] for granting or [denial of] denying the continuance.
[(b)] (C) A motion for continuance on behalf of the defendant shall be made not later than [forty-eight (] 48 [)] hours before the time set for the trial. A later motion shall be entertained only when the opportunity therefor did not previously exist, or the defendant was not aware of the grounds for the motion, or the interests of justice require it.
Official Note: Rule 301 [Adopted] adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; amended June 8, 1973, effective July 1, 1973[,] ; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; renumbered Rule 106 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule [313] 585. Nolle Prosequi.
[(a)] (A) Upon motion of the attorney for the Commonwealth, the court may, in open court, order a nolle prosequi of one or more charges notwithstanding the objection of any person.
[(b)] (B) Upon a nolle prosequi, costs may be imposed as the court may direct.
Comment Section 8932 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 932, prohibits the district attorney from entering a nolle prosequi without court approval at any time after the filing of an information.
Before an information is filed, the attorney for the Commonwealth may withdraw one or more of the charges by filing a notice of withdrawal with the clerk of courts. See Rule [224(a)] 561(A). Upon the filing of an information, any charge in the complaint not listed on the information will be deemed withdrawn by the attorney for the Commonwealth. See Rule [224(b)] 561(B). After the information is filed, court approval is required before a nolle prosequi may be entered on a charge listed therein. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 8932.
Official Note: [Formerly] Rule 314[,] adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; Comment [amended] revised February 15, 1974, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 313 and Comment [amended] revised June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978, Comment revised January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended August 12, 1993, effective September 1, 1993; amended August 14, 1995, effective January 1, 1996; renumbered Rule 585 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Report explaining the August 12, 1993 amendments published at 22 Pa.B. 3826 (July 25, 1992).
Final Report explaining the August 14, 1995 amendments published with the Court's Order at 25 Pa.B. 3468 (August 26, 1995).
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule [314] 586. Court Dismissal Upon Satisfaction or Agreement.
When a defendant is charged with an offense which is not alleged to have been committed by force or violence or threat thereof, the court may order the case to be dismissed upon motion and a showing that:
[(a)] (1) the public interest will not be adversely affected; and
[(b)] (2) the attorney for the Commonwealth consents to the dismissal; and
[(c)] (3) satisfaction has been made to the aggrieved person or there is an agreement that satisfaction will be made to the aggrieved person; and
[(d)] (4) there is an agreement as to who shall pay the costs.
Comment This rule applies only to courts of common pleas. Neither justices of the peace, district justices, Philadelphia Municipal Court judges, Pittsburgh Police Magistrates, nor any other issuing authority may dismiss a case under this rule, but rather only as provided in Rule [145] 546.
This rule [was amended in 1983 to set] sets forth concisely the criteria a defendant must satisfy before the court has the discretion to order dismissal under this rule.
Official Note: Rule 315 [Adopted] adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; amended September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; [; formerly Rule 315,] renumbered Rule 314 and amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; renumbered Rule 586 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 328. [Photography and Broadcasting in the Courtroom and its Environs] (Rescinded).
[The taking of photographs in the courtroom or its environs or radio or television broadcasting from the courtroom or its environs during the progress of or in connection with any judicial proceedings, whether or not the court is actually in session, is prohibited. The environs of the courtroom is defined as the area immediately surrounding the entrances and exits to the courtroom.
This rule is not intended to prohibit the taking of photographs or radio or television broadcasting of proceedings such as naturalization ceremonies or the swearing in of public officials which may be conducted in the courtroom.
Comment See also Rule 27 for provisions concerning publicity of preliminary hearings and summary trials.
This rule is not intended to preclude the use of recording devices for the preservation of testimony as permitted by Rules 9015 and 9015A.]
Official Note: Rule 328 [Adopted] adopted January 25, 1971, effective February 1, 1971; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; Comment revised March 22, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; rescinded and replaced by new Rule 112 March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule 340. [Suspension of Acts of Assembly] (Rescinded).
[The following Acts of Assembly are hereby suspended:
(a) The Public Defender Act, Act of December 2, 1968, P. L. 1144, No. 358, § 1 et. seq. as amended through Act of December 10, 1974, P. L. 830, No. 277, § 1; 16 P. S. § 9960.1 et. seq., only insofar as inconsistent with Rule 316.
(b) Section 5720 of the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, Act of October 4, 1978, P. L. 831, No. 164, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5720, only insofar as it may delay disclosure to a defendant seeking discovery under Rule 305B(1)(g), as inconsistent with Rule 305; and Section 5721(b) of the Act, 18 Pa. C.S. § 5721(b), only insofar as the time frame for making a motion to suppress is concerned, as inconsistent with Rules 307 and 323.
Comment Paragraphs (a)--(d) and (f) were deleted in 1983 as unnecessary in view of the Judiciary Act Repealer Act, which repealed the Acts of Assembly that were suspended by those paragraphs. See Act of April 28, 1978, P. L. 202, No. 53, § 2(a); 42 P. S. § 20002(a) [191], [377], [451], [656], [658], [691], [799], [1310], [1341] (1979). Former paragraph (e), now paragraph (a), was amended at the same time in view of the Public Defender Act, which replaced the Acts that were previously suspended by that paragraph. Former paragraph (g) is retained in full and renumbered paragraph (b).]
Official Note: [This rule] Rule 340 [combines] combined former Rules 321 and 322, which were the previous suspension rules. Adopted June 29, 1977, effective September 1, 1977; amended April 24, 1981, effective June 1, 1981; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; rescinded and replaced by Rule 1101 March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court's Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Rule [1108] 633. Examination and Challenges of Alternate Trial Jurors.
[(a)] (A) The trial judge may direct that a reasonable even number of jurors in addition to the principal jurors be called and impaneled to sit as alternate jurors. [Alternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace principal jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties. An alternate juror who does not replace a principal juror shall be discharged before the jury retires to consider its verdict.
(b)] (B) When alternate jurors are selected in trials involving only one defendant, the defendant and the Commonwealth shall each be entitled to one peremptory challenge for each [two] 2 alternate jurors to be selected. When alternate jurors are selected in trials involving joint defendants, each defendant shall be entitled to one peremptory challenge for each [two] 2 alternate jurors to be selected and the Commonwealth shall be entitled to peremptory challenges equal in number to the total number of peremptory challenges given to all of the defendants. All peremptory challenges remaining unexercised after the selection of the principal [twelve] 12 jurors shall be considered exhausted, and in no case may the challenges reserved for the selection of alternates be added to the number allowed during the selection of the principal [twelve] 12.
[(c)] (C) Alternate jurors shall be examined, challenged, and selected in the same manner as the principal jurors.
[Continued on next Web Page]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
