THE COURTS
Title 234—RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
[ 234 PA. CODE CH. 1 ]
Order Amending Rules 140, 141 and 142 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure; No. 410 Criminal Procedural Rules Doc.
[42 Pa.B. 1364]
[Saturday, March 17, 2012]
Order Per Curiam
And Now, this 1st day of March, 2012, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been published before adoption at 40 Pa.B. 4143 (July 24, 2010), and in the Atlantic Reporter (Second Series Advance Sheets, Vol. 996), 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 Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure 140, 141, and 142 are amended in the following form.
This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(b), and shall be effective July 1, 2012.
Annex A
TITLE 234. RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 1. SCOPE OF RULES, CONSTRUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, LOCAL RULES
PART D. Procedures Implementing 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139: Criminal Contempt Powers of District Justices, Judges of the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court, and Judges of the Traffic Court of Philadelphia Rule 140. Contempt Proceedings Before [District Justices] Magisterial District Judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court Judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court Judges.
(A) CONTEMPT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE COURT
1. An issuing authority may summarily hold an individual in contempt for misbehavior in the presence of the court [which] that obstructs the administration of justice, and, after affording the individual an opportunity to be heard, may impose a punishment of a fine of not more than $100 or imprisonment [as provided by law] for not more than 30 days or both.
* * * * * 3. The issuing authority shall issue a written order of contempt, in which the issuing authority shall:
a. set forth the facts of the case [which] that constitute the contempt;
* * * * * (B) CONTEMPT NOT IN THE PRESENCE OF THE COURT
1. INSTITUTION OF PROCEEDINGS
a. An issuing authority may institute contempt proceedings by either
(1) giving written notice to the alleged contemnor of the time, date, and place of the contempt hearing, or
(2) when deemed appropriate by the issuing authority, issuing an attachment by means of a warrant,
whenever a person is alleged to have (i) failed to obey a subpoena issued by the issuing authority; (ii) failed to comply with an order of the issuing authority directing a defendant to pay fines and costs in accordance with an installment payment order; (iii) failed to comply with an order of [a district justice] an issuing authority directing a defendant to compensate a victim; or (iv) [violated an order issued pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6110; or (v)] failed to comply with an order of an issuing authority in any case in which the issuing authority is by statute given the power to find the person in contempt.
b. If the proceedings are instituted by notice, the notice shall:
(1) specify the acts or omissions and the essential facts constituting the contempt charged;
(2) advise what the [statutorily provided] punishment may be for a finding of contempt in the case;
(3) if, in the event of a finding of contempt, there is a likelihood that the punishment will be imprisonment, advise the alleged contemnor of the right to the assistance of counsel and that counsel will be assigned pursuant to Rule 122 if the alleged contemnor is without financial resources or is otherwise unable to employ counsel; and
(4) advise the alleged contemnor that failure to appear at the hearing may result in the issuance of a bench warrant [of arrest].
* * * * * 2. HEARING
* * * * * b. At the conclusion of the hearing:
* * * * * (3) If the issuing authority finds contempt and imposes punishment, the issuing authority shall issue a written order of contempt setting forth:
(a) the facts of the case [which] that constitute the contempt;
* * * * * c. The issuing authority shall not hold a contempt hearing in the absence of the alleged contemnor. If the alleged contemnor fails to appear for the contempt hearing, the issuing authority may continue the hearing and issue a bench warrant [of arrest].
3. PUNISHMENT
Punishment for contempt may not exceed the limits set forth as follows:
a. Whenever a person is found to have failed to obey a subpoena issued by the issuing authority, punishment may be a fine of not more than $100. Failure to pay the fine within a reasonable time may result in imprisonment for not more than 10 days.
b. Whenever a person is found to have failed to comply with an order of the issuing authority directing a defendant to pay fines and costs in accordance with an installment payment order, punishment may be imprisonment for not more than 90 days.
c. Whenever a person is found to have failed to comply with an order of an issuing authority directing a defendant to compensate a victim, punishment may be a fine of not more than $100 or imprisonment for not more than 30 days, or both.
Comment This rule sets forth the procedures to implement 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139 concerning contempt powers of the minor judiciary, as well as any other statutes subsequently enacted [which] that would provide for findings of contempt by the minor judiciary. It is not intended to supplant the procedures set forth in 23 Pa.C.S. § [6113] 6110 et seq. concerning violations of protection from abuse orders.
The scope of the contempt powers of [district justices] magisterial district judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court judges is governed by 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139 respectively. Therefore, as used in this rule, ''issuing authority'' refers only to [district justices] magisterial district judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court judges when acting within the scope of their contempt powers. However, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(c), 4138(c), and 4139(c) contain limitations upon the punishment that a minor court may impose for contempt. Such statutory limitations were held to be unconstitutional in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 599 Pa. 435, 961 A.2d 842 (2008).
By Orders dated November 29, 2004, 34 Pa.B. 6507 (December 11, 2004) and February 25, 2005, 35 Pa.B. 1662 (March 12, 2005), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court created an administrative judicial unit referred to as the Pittsburgh Municipal Court and assigned all matters within the jurisdiction of the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court to the Pittsburgh Municipal Court. As a result of these orders, the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court is no longer staffed while the Pittsburgh Municipal Court is staffed by Allegheny County magisterial district judges assigned on a rotating basis. The terminology is retained in these rules because the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court, which is created by statute, has not been disestablished by the statute.
All contempt proceedings under this rule are to be entered on the issuing authority's miscellaneous docket, and a separate docket transcript for the contempt proceeding is to be prepared. If an appeal is taken, the issuing authority is required to forward the transcript and the contempt order to the clerk of courts. See Rule 141.
Paragraph (A) sets forth the procedures for handling contempt proceedings when the misbehavior is committed in the presence of the court and is obstructing the administration of justice. See 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(a)(1), 4138(a)(1), and 4139(a)(1). This type of contempt is commonly referred to as ''direct'' or ''summary'' contempt. The issuing authority may immediately impose punishment without a formal hearing because prompt action is necessary to maintain or restore order in the courtroom and to protect the authority and dignity of the court. Although immediate action is permitted in these cases, the alleged contemnor is ordinarily given an opportunity to be heard before the imposition of punishment. See Commonwealth v. Stevenson, 482 Pa. 76, 393 A.2d 386 ([Pa.] 1978).
Customarily, individuals are not held in summary contempt for misbehavior before the court without prior oral warning by the presiding judicial officer.
Paragraph (B) provides the procedures for instituting and conducting proceedings in all other cases of alleged contemptuous conduct subject to the minor judiciary's statutory contempt powers, which are commonly referred to as ''indirect criminal contempt'' proceedings.
For purposes of this rule, the phrase ''failed to obey a subpoena issued by the issuing authority'' in paragraph (B)(1)(a) is intended to include the failure to obey any other lawful process ordering the person to appear before an issuing authority.
Pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(a)(2), (3), and (4), [and (5),] 4138(a)(2) and (3), and 4139(a)(2) and (3), only [district justices] issuing authorities have the power to impose punishment for contempt of court for failure to comply with an order directing a defendant to compensate a victim [or an order issued pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6110]. See paragraph (B)1.a.
''Indirect criminal contempt'' proceedings must be instituted either by serving the alleged contemnor with a notice of the contempt hearing, or by issuing an attachment in the form of a warrant. The alleged contemnor must be afforded the same due process protections that are normally provided in criminal proceedings, including notice of the charges, an opportunity to be heard and to present a defense, and counsel. See, e.g., Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506 (1974), and Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194 (1968).
When a warrant [of arrest] is executed under this rule, the alleged contemnor should be taken without unreasonable delay before the proper issuing authority.
Although 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(a)(4), 4138(a)(3), and 4139(a)(3) permit an issuing authority to impose summary punishments for indirect criminal contempt when a defendant fails to comply with an order of the issuing authority directing the defendant to pay fines and costs in accordance with an installment payment order, nothing in this rule is intended to preclude an issuing authority from proceeding pursuant to Rule 456 (Default Procedures: Restitution, Fines, and Costs).
No defendant may be sentenced to imprisonment if the right to counsel was not afforded at the contempt hearing. See Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002), Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367 (1979), and Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972). Also see Rule 454 concerning counsel in summary cases. The Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Abrams, 461 Pa. 327, 336 A.2d 308 ([Pa.] 1975) held that the right to counsel applies in cases of criminal contempt. See also Commonwealth v. Crawford, 466 Pa. 269, 352 A.2d 52 ([Pa.] 1976).
For the assignment of counsel, follow the Rule 122 procedures for summary cases.
For waiver of counsel, follow the Rule 121 procedures for proceedings before an issuing authority.
For the procedures for taking, perfecting, and handling an appeal from an order entered pursuant to this rule, see Rule 141.
If a contemnor defaults in the payment of a fine imposed as punishment for contempt pursuant to [42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(c), 4138(c), or 4139(c)] this rule, the matter is to proceed as provided in Rule 142.
See Chapter 5 Part C concerning bail before a contempt hearing. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137(e) concerning a [district justice's] magisterial district judge's authority to set bail after an adjudication of contempt.
Paragraphs (A)2.e and (B)2.b(2)(e) require the issuing authority to set a date for the contemnor to pay any fine or to appear for execution of any punishment of imprisonment. This date should be at least 35 days from the date of the contempt proceeding to allow for the expiration of the 30-day automatic stay period and the 5-day period within which the clerk of courts is to serve a copy of the notice of appeal on the issuing authority. See Rule 141.
Paragraph (B)2.b(5) requires that the case be reviewed at the conclusion of a contempt hearing to determine whether the restitution order or the fines and costs installment order should be altered or amended, rather than scheduling another hearing. This review should be conducted whether or not the [district justice] issuing authority finds an individual in contempt for failure to comply with an order to pay restitution, or whether or not the issuing authority finds an individual in contempt for failure to comply with an installment order to pay fines and costs. For the authority to alter or amend a restitution order, see 18 Pa.C.S. § [106(c)(2)(iii)] 1106(c)(3).
Official Note: Rule 30 adopted October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; renumbered Rule 140 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised March 26, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended March 1, 2012, effective July 1, 2012.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 30 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. [1477] 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Final Report explaining the March 26, 2004 Comment revision concerning right to counsel published with the Court's Order at 34 Pa.B. 1931 (April 10, 2004).
Final Report explaining the amendments concerning limitations on punishment for contempt published with the Court's Order at 42 Pa.B. 1367 (March 17, 2012).
Rule 141. Appeals from Contempt Adjudications by [District Justices] Magisterial District Judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court Judges, or Philadelphia Traffic Court Judges.
* * * * * (E) 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) either the notice of the hearing or a copy of the attachment;
(3) the contempt order; and
(4) any bench warrant [of arrest].
* * * * *
Comment This rule provides the procedures for taking an appeal from a finding of contempt by a [district justice] magisterial district judge, a Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judge, or a Philadelphia Traffic Court judge.
As used in this rule, ''issuing authority'' refers only to [district justices] magisterial district judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court judges when acting within the scope of their contempt powers. See 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139.
By Orders dated November 29, 2004, 34 Pa.B. 6507 (December 11, 2004) and February 25, 2005, 35 Pa.B. 1662 (March 12, 2005), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court created an administrative judicial unit referred to as the Pittsburgh Municipal Court and assigned all matters within the jurisdiction of the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court to the Pittsburgh Municipal Court. As a result of these orders, the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court is no longer staffed while the Pittsburgh Municipal Court is staffed by Allegheny County magisterial district judges assigned on a rotating basis. The terminology is retained in these rules because the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court, which is created by statute, has not been disestablished by the statute.
As the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 599 Pa. 435, 961 A.2d 842 (2008), legislative limitations on a court's power to sentence for contempt are unconstitutional.
Pursuant to paragraph (B), any punishment imposed for contempt will be automatically stayed for 30 days from the date of the imposition of the punishment, during which time a notice of appeal may be filed with the clerk of courts. To the extent that 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(d), 4138(d), and 4139(d) are inconsistent with this rule, they are suspended by Rule 1101 (Suspension of Acts of Assembly).
If no notice of appeal is filed within the 30-day period following imposition of the punishment, Rule 140 requires the issuing authority to direct the contemnor on a date certain to pay any fine imposed or to appear for execution of any punishment of imprisonment.
See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137(e) concerning the imposition of bail as a condition of release by a [district justice] magisterial district judge.
The procedures set forth in Rule 462 (Trial [de] De Novo) for a trial de novo on a summary case should be followed when a contempt adjudication is appealed to the common pleas court.
* * * * * Official Note: Rule 31 adopted October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; renumbered Rule 141 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended February 28, 2003, effective July 1, 2003; Comment revised March 26, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended March 1, 2012, effective July 1, 2012.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 31 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. [1477] 1478 (March 18, 2000).
Final Report explaining the February 28, 2003 amendments concerning contempt appeals published with the Court's Order at 33 Pa.B. 1326 (March 15, 2003).
Final Report explaining the March 26, 2004 Comment revision concerning right to counsel published with the Court's Order at 34 Pa.B. 1931 (April 10, 2004).
Final Report explaining the amendments regarding limitations on punishment for contempt published with the Court's Order at 42 Pa.B. 1367 (March 17, 2012).
Rule 142. Procedures Governing Defaults in Payment of Fine Imposed as Punishment for Contempt.
(A) If a contemnor defaults on the payment of a fine imposed as punishment for contempt pursuant to [42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(c), 4138(c), or 4139(c)] Rule 140(A)(1) and (B)(3), the issuing authority shall notify the contemnor in person or by first class mail that within 10 days of the date on the default notice the contemnor must either:
(1) pay the amount due as ordered, or
(2) appear before the issuing authority to explain why the contemnor should not be imprisoned for nonpayment as provided by law, or a bench warrant for the contemnor's arrest shall be issued.
* * * * *
Comment This rule provides the procedures governing defaults in the payment of fines imposed as punishment for contempt in proceedings before [district justices] magisterial district judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court judges. See [42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137(c), 4138(c), or 4139(c)] Rule 140(A)(1) and (B)(3).
As used in this rule, ''issuing authority'' refers only to [district justices] magisterial district judges, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court judges when acting within the scope of their contempt powers. See 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4137, 4138, and 4139.
By Orders dated November 29, 2004, 34 Pa.B. 6507 (December 11, 2004) and February 25, 2005, 35 Pa.B. 1662 (March 12, 2005), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court created an administrative judicial unit referred to as the Pittsburgh Municipal Court and assigned all matters within the jurisdiction of the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court to the Pittsburgh Municipal Court. As a result of these orders, the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court is no longer staffed while the Pittsburgh Municipal Court is staffed by Allegheny County magisterial district judges assigned on a rotating basis. The terminology is retained in these rules because the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court, which is created by statute, has not been disestablished by the statute.
For contempt procedures generally, see Rule 140.
As the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 599 Pa. 435, 961 A.2d 842 (2008), legislative limitations on a court's power to sentence for contempt are unconstitutional.
When a contemnor defaults on a payment of a fine, paragraph (A) requires the issuing authority to notify the contemnor of the default, and to provide the contemnor with an opportunity to either pay the amount due or appear within a 10-day period to explain why the contemnor should not be imprisoned for nonpayment. If the contemnor fails to pay or appear, the issuing authority must issue a bench warrant for the arrest of the contemnor.
If the hearing on the default cannot be held immediately, the issuing authority may set bail as provided in Chapter 5 Part C.
This rule contemplates that when there has been an appeal pursuant to paragraph (C), the case would return to the issuing authority who presided at the default hearing for completion of the collection process.
Official Note: Rule 32 adopted October 1, 1997, effective October 1, 1998; renumbered Rule 142 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended March 1, 2012, effective July 1, 2012.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 32 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).
Final Report explaining the March 3, 2004 rule changes deleting ''show cause'' published with the Court's Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).
Final Report explaining the rule changes regarding limitations on punishment for contempt published with the Court's Order at 42 Pa.B. 1367 (March 17, 2012).
FINAL REPORT1
Amendments to Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 140, 141, and 142
Limitations on Punishment for Contempt in the Minor Courts On March 1, 2012, effective July 1, 2012, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, the Court amended Rules of Criminal Procedure 140 (Contempt Proceedings Before District Justices, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court Judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court Judges), 141 (Appeals from Contempt Adjudications by District Justices, Pittsburgh Magistrates Court Judges, and Philadelphia Traffic Court Judges), and 142 (Procedures Governing Defaults in Payment of Fine Imposed as Punishment for Contempt) to provide for limitations on punishment for contempt before the minor judiciary.
On December 18, 2008, the Court issued the opinion in Commonwealth v. McMullen, 961 A.2d 842 (Pa. 2008), which held, inter alia, that the Legislature may not ''create a form of indirect criminal contempt and restrict the court's ability to punish individuals who commit contempt of court,'' and therefore 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(b), which provides that the punishment for the indirect criminal contempt addressed in the statute is limited to a fine not exceeding $100 or imprisonment not exceeding 15 days and that the defendant is entitled to a jury trial, ''unconstitutionally restricts the court's ability to punish for contempt.'' This case was brought to the Committee's attention because, although the case addresses only the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S. § 4136(b) (indirect criminal contempt), 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137(c) also mandates the sentence that may be imposed for contempt before magisterial district judges. From its review of the McMullen opinion and these statutes, as well as the Committee's history of Rules 140-142, the Committee concluded that the holding in McMullen applied to the statutory limitations on punishment imposed on the minor judiciary.
Rules 140, 141, and 142, adopted in 1997, implement 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137 providing the procedures for instituting the contempt proceedings, etc., but do not address the punishment provisions in 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137(c).2 The rules also reference 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 4138 and 4139 defining similar contempt powers for the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court and Philadelphia Traffic Court, respectively. In considering the scope of the Mullen opinion, the Committee reasoned that parameters should be placed on the imposition of punishment by the minor courts for contempt. Furthermore, the members agreed that the statutory limitations were reasonable, but that such limitations belong more properly in the Criminal Rules. Accordingly, Rule 140 has been amended by the addition of punishment provisions that are comparable to the provisions in 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137(c).
Rule 140 is the general rule for contempt procedures in the magisterial district courts, the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court, and the Philadelphia Traffic Court. Rule 140 breaks the procedures down into two contempt categories, contempt committed in the presence of the court, and contempt occurring outside of the presence of the court. Each contempt category and associated procedures are described separately. The punishment limitations for contempt before the court are incorporated into paragraph (A)(1). The punishment limitations for contempt occurring outside of the presence of the court are enumerated in new paragraph (B)(3).
One of the punishment limitations listed in 42 Pa.C.S. § 4137 applies to a violation of an order issued pursuant to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6110, the portion of the Protection from Abuse Act authorizing emergency protection from abuse orders to be issued by the minor judiciary. The Committee concluded that protection from abuse proceedings are unique and that any punishment limitations in the rare circumstance under which the minor judiciary would adjudicate contempt under this statute are not appropriately addressed in a general Rule of Criminal Procedure. In view of this, the reference to 23 Pa.C.S. § 6110 was deleted from Rule 140(B)(2). Correlatively, the existing language in the first paragraph of the Comment that explains that the rule ''is not intended to supplant the procedures set forth in 23 Pa.C.S. § 6113 concerning violations of protection from abuse orders'' would be expanded to include the entire Protection from Abuse Act, 23 Pa.C.S. § 6110 et seq.
Rule 140 contains one category of contempt for which the statutes do not provide any limitation on punishment. That category is described as a failure to ''comply with an order of an issuing authority in any case in which the issuing authority is by statute given the power to find the person in contempt.'' The Committee noted that the only example of such a statute not covered by the existing punishment provisions is found in 42 Pa.C.S. § 1523 that permits the magisterial district judge to issue an order directing the parent or guardian of the juvenile to appear at the hearing in summary cases before a magisterial district judge in which the defendant is a juvenile. Since failing to obey the order to appear is qualitatively the same as failing to obey a subpoena, language has been added to the Rule 140 Comment clarifying that the rule's use of the phrase ''failed to obey a subpoena issued by the issuing authority'' includes any other lawful process ordering the person to appear before an issuing authority.
Another revision to the Rule 140 Comment is an explanation regarding the status of the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court. Currently, the Pittsburgh Magistrates Court is no longer staffed and its function has been taken over by the Pittsburgh Municipal Court that is staffed by magisterial district judges. However, since the Magistrates Court has never been disestablished and theoretically could be re-staffed, the terminology is retained in the rules with an explanation in the Comments to Rules 140, 141, and 142 about the establishment of the Pittsburgh Municipal Court and the status of the Magistrates Court.
Rule 141 provides procedures for appeal from contempt findings in the minor courts, and does not address any matters related to punishment limitations. Therefore, only a general cross-reference to holding in the McMullen case has been added to the Comment.
Rule 142 provides procedures for the handling of defaults in payment of fines imposed for contempt. The Rule 142 Comment contained cross-references to the punishment provisions of the statutes. Conforming to the other changes, that cross-reference has been changed to refer to the punishment provisions that have been added to Rule 140.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 12-477. Filed for public inspection March 16, 2012, 9:00 a.m.] _______
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 At the time, the Committee believed that the scope of the punishment was substantive and therefore not subject for the Court's rule-making authority, and did not question the constitutionality of the punishment provisions of the statutes.
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.
