THE COURTS
Title 234--RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
[234 PA. CODE CHS. 1 AND 5]
Order Adopting Amendments to Rules 130 and 555; No. 309 Criminal Procedural Rules; Doc. No. 2
[34 Pa.B. 2910] The Criminal Procedure Rules Committee has prepared a Final Report explaining the May 21, 2004 changes to Rules of Criminal Procedure 130 and 555 that make discretionary the decision to transfer proceedings when the charges arise from the same criminal episode and occur in more than one judicial district. The Final Report follows the Court's Order.
Order Per Curiam:
Now, this 21st day of May, 2004, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been submitted without publication pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. 103(a)(3) in the interests of justice and efficient administration, and a Final Report to be published with this Order:
It Is Ordered pursuant to Article V, Section 10 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania that Rules of Criminal Procedure 130 and 555 are amended in the attached form.
This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. 103(b), and shall be effective July 1, 2004.
Annex A
TITLE 234. RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 1. SCOPE OF RULES, CONSTRUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, LOCAL RULES Rule 130. Venue; Transfer of Proceedings.
(A) VENUE
All criminal proceedings in summary and court cases shall be brought before the issuing authority for the magisterial district in which the offense is alleged to have occurred or before an issuing authority on temporary assignment to serve such magisterial district, subject, however, to the following exceptions:
* * * * * (3) When charges arising from the same criminal episode occur in more than one judicial district, the criminal proceeding on all the charges [should] may be brought before one issuing authority in a magisterial district within any of the judicial districts in which the charges arising from the same criminal episode occurred.
* * * * *
Comment [Paragraph (A)(3), which is an exception to the general rule governing venue, was added in 2000 in view of Commonwealth v. McPhail, 692 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1997), in which the Court held that ''all charges stemming from a single crimi-nal episode'' must be joined in a single trial ''despite the fact that some of the charges arose in a different county.'' Accordingly, when] When charges arising from a single criminal episode occur in more than one judicial district, the magisterial district in which the proceeding on all the charges is brought, i.e., the one with venue, may be any one of the magisterial districts in which the charges occurred. See Commonwealth v. Geyer, 687 A.2d 815 (Pa. 1996) (the compulsory joinder rule and 18 Pa.C.S. § 110 apply when two or more summary offenses arise from a single criminal episode).* * * * * Official Note: Formerly Rule 154, adopted January 16, 1970, effective immediately; section (a)(3) adopted July 1, 1970, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 21 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended July 1, 1980, effective August 1, 1980; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; renumbered Rule 130 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended April 20, 2000, effective July 1, 2000; amended September 19, 2000, effective January 1, 2001; amended May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002; amended May 21, 2004, effective July 1 , 2004.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * * Final Report explaining the May 21, 2004 changes concerning joinder published with the Court's Order at 34 Pa.B. 2911 (June 5, 2004).
CHAPTER 5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES IN
COURT CASES
PART D. PROCEEDINGS IN COURT CASES BEFORE ISSUING AUTHORITIES Rule 555. Transfer of Proceedings.
(A) In all cases in which charges arising from a single criminal episode occur in more than one judicial district:
(1) If the charges are filed in more than one judicial district, at any time after the case is held for court, the proceedings [shall] may be transferred to one of the judicial districts.
* * * * *
Comment [The Supreme Court held in Commonwealth v. McPhail, 692 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1997), that the trial in one judicial district of some of the charges arising from a single criminal episode may be a bar to the trial in another judicial district of the other charges arising from the same criminal episode. In view of this decision, it is incumbent upon law enforcement officers and prosecutors to be vigilant about instituting proceedings and proceeding to trial in cases in which there are multi-judicial district charges arising from a single criminal episode.][The McPhail decision has necessitated both a clarification of the procedures for the institution of criminal proceedings, and new procedures for] Rule 555 permits the transfer of pro-ceedings in cases in which multiple charges arising from a single criminal episode have occurred in more than one judicial district so all the charges may be tried together in one judicial district. [See Rule 130(B) for the procedures for transferring charges prior to the preliminary hearing.]In many cases, multiple charges arising from a single criminal episode will be known to the police officers and attorneys for the Commonwealth involved in the case, and will be joined in the first instance in one criminal complaint, and filed before one issuing authority in one judicial district. See Rule 130(A)(3). However, since there may be cases in which this does not occur, and the charges are filed in more than one judicial district, [new] Rule [300] 555 establishes the procedures, after such a case is held for court, for the transfer of proceedings to one judicial district. See Rule 130(B) for the procedures for transferring charges prior to the preliminary hearing. Rule [300] 555 also governs the transfer of charges in cases in which all the charges are filed in one judicial district, but the parties or the attorneys for the Commonwealth agree that the charges should have been filed in one of the other judicial districts in which the charges occurred.* * * * * Official Note: Former Rule 300 rescinded June 28, 1974, effective immediately; rescinded and number reserved 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; new Rule 300 adopted April 20, 2000, effective July 1, 2000; renumbered Rule 555 effective April 1, 2001; amended May 21, 2004, effective July 1, 2004.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * * Final Report explaining the May 21, 2004 changes published with the Court's Order at 34 Pa.B. 2911 (June 5, 2004).
FINAL REPORT1
Amendments to Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 130 and 555
Transfer of Proceedings On May 21, 2004, effective July 1, 2004, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, the Court amended Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 130 (Venue; Transfer of Proceedings) and 555 (Transfer of Proceedings) making discretionary the decision to transfer proceedings when the charges arise from the same criminal episode and occur in more than one judicial district. These changes are the result of the Committee's reconsideration of the mandatory transfer provisions that had been incorporated into Rules 130 and 5552 in view of the interplay between the 18 Pa.C.S. § 110 provisions and the Court's 1997 holding in Commonwealth v. McPhail, 692 A.2d 139 (Pa. 1997), and the concerns raised with the Committee that these rule provisions are no longer viable in view of the following changes to Section 110:3
§ 110. When prosecution barred by former prosecution for different offense.Although a prosecution is for a violation of a different provision of the statutes than a former prosecution or is based on different facts, it is barred by such former prosecution under the following circumstances:(1) The former prosecution resulted in acquittal or in a conviction as defined in Section 109 of this Title (Relating to When Prosecution Barred by Former Prosecution for the Same Offense) and the subsequent prosecution is for:* * * * * (II) Any offense based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal episode, if such offense was known to the appropriate prosecuting officer at the time of the commencement of the first trial and [was] occurred within the [jurisdiction of a single court] same judicial district as the former prosecution unless the court ordered a separate trial of the charge of such offense; or* * * * * In considering the Rule 555 mandatory procedures vis a vis the new Section 110 language, the Committee members noted:
* although McPhail applies Section 110, McPhail also confirmed that the common pleas courts have statewide jurisdiction, and therefore from a constitutional-procedural point of view, the courts still have to decide where a case will be tried when there are overlapping districts involved
* Section 110 is a Crimes Code provision, not a jurisdictional statute, so the changes to Section 110 do not affect the Court's jurisdictional interpretation in McPhail
* with the change to Section 110, dismissal for failure to consolidate charges is no longer an issue. However, the criminal justice system would benefit by retaining the means to consolidate when consolidation is desired or when it would be difficult to try the charges separately
In view of the ''history'' and the members' analysis of the interplay between Section 110, McPhail, and Rules 130 and 555, the Committee agreed the mandatory aspects in Rule 130(A)(3) and Rule 555(A)(1) are no longer required, but that the transfer provisions should be retained as discretionary with the attorney(s) for the Commonwealth. This will promote judicial economy, and will benefit the members of the bench and bar, and the defendant. Accordingly, Rule 130(A)(3) has been amended by changing ''all the charges should be brought'' to ''all the charges may be brought'' and Rule 555(A)(1) has been amended by changing ''the proceedings shall be transferred'' to ''the proceedings may be transferred.'' Conforming changes have been made to the Comments to both rules.
______
1 The Committee's Final Reports should not be confused with the official Committee Comments to the rules. Also note that the Supreme Court does not adopt the Committee's Comments or the contents of the Committee's explanatory Final Reports.
2 Rule 555 was adopted, and Rule 130 was amended, by the Court in 2000 in view of McPhail to provide, inter alia, uniform procedures for the transfer of proceedings in cases in which there are multiple charges in more than one judicial district, or in more than one magisterial district, arising from a single criminal episode.
3 The changes were included in Act 82 of 2002. The deletions to the statute are shown in brackets and bold type, and the additions are underlined and bold.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 04-971. Filed for public inspection June 4, 2004, 9:00 a.m.]
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.
