THE COURTS
Title 234—RULES OF
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
[ 234 PA. CODE CHS. 1, 2 AND 5 ]
Proposed New Pa.R.Crim.P. 113.1, Proposed Amendment of Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 206, 504, 560 and 575 and Proposed Revision of the Comment to Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 513 and 578
[47 Pa.B. 4674]
[Saturday, August 12, 2017]The Criminal Procedural Rules Committee is considering proposing to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania adoption of New Rule 113.1, the amendment of Rules 206, 504, 560 and 575, and the revision of the Comments to Rules 513 and 578 for the reasons set forth in the accompanying explanatory report. Pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(a)(1), the proposal is being published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin for comments, suggestions, or objections prior to submission to the Supreme Court.
Any reports, notes, or comments in the proposal have been inserted by the Committee for the convenience of those using the rules. They neither will constitute a part of the rules nor will be officially adopted by the Supreme Court.
Additions to the text of the proposal are bolded; deletions to the text are bolded and bracketed.
The Committee invites all interested persons to submit comments, suggestions, or objections in writing to:
Jeffrey M. Wasileski, Counsel
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Criminal Procedural Rules Committee
601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 6200
Harrisburg, PA 17106-2635
fax: (717) 231-9521
e-mail: criminalrules@pacourts.usAll communications in reference to the proposal should be received by no later than Tuesday, September 12, 2017. E-mail is the preferred method for submitting comments, suggestions, or objections; any e-mailed submission need not be reproduced and resubmitted via mail. The Committee will acknowledge receipt of all submissions.
By the Criminal Procedural
Rules CommitteeCHARLES A. EHRLICH,
Chair
Annex A
TITLE 234. RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 1. SCOPE OF RULES, CONSTRUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, LOCAL RULES
PART A. Business of the Courts (Editor's Note: The following rule is proposed to be added and printed in regular type to enhance readability.)
Rule 113.1. Confidential Information and Confidential Documents. Certification.
Unless public access is otherwise constrained by applicable authority, any attorney, or any party if unrepresented, or any affiant who files a document pursuant to these rules with the issuing authority or clerk of courts' office shall comply with the requirements of Sections 7.0 and 8.0 of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts (Policy). In accordance with the Policy, the filing shall include a certification of compliance with the Policy and, as necessary, a Confidential Information Form, unless otherwise specified by rule of court, or a Confidential Document Form.''
Comment ''Applicable authority,'' as used in this rule, includes but is not limited to statute, procedural rule, or court order. The Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts (Policy) can be found on the website of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania at ______ . The Policy is applicable to all filings by the parties or an affiant in any criminal court case.
Sections 7.0(D) and 8.0(D) of the Policy provide that the certification shall be in substantially the following form:
I certify that this filing complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts that require filing confidential information and documents differently than non-confidential information and documents.Filings may require further precautions, such as placing certain types of information in a ''Confidential Information Form.'' The Confidential Information Form and the Confidential Document Form can be found at ____ . In lieu of the Confidential Information Form, Section 7.0(C) of the Policy provides for a court to adopt a rule or order pursuant to Pa.R.J.A. No. 103(c) permitting the filing of a document in two versions, a ''Redacted Version'' and an ''Unredacted Version.''
In addition to the restrictions above, a filing party should be cognizant of the potential impact that inclusion of personal information may have on an individual's privacy rights and security. Therefore, inclusion of such information should be done only when necessary or required to effectuate the purpose of the filing. Consideration of the use of sealing or protective orders also should be given if inclusion of such information is necessary.
While the Public Access Policy is not applicable to orders or other documents filed by a court, judges should give consideration to the privacy interests addressed by the Policy when drafting an order that might include information considered confidential under the Policy.
Official Note: New Rule 113.1 adopted , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Report explaining the provisions of the new rule published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
CHAPTER 2. INVESTIGATIONS
PART A. Search Warrant Rule 206. Contents of Application for Search Warrant.
Each application for a search warrant shall be supported by written affidavit(s) signed and sworn to or affirmed before an issuing authority, which affidavit(s) shall:
* * * * *
(7) if a ''nighttime'' search is requested (i.e., 10 p.m. to 6 a.m.), state additional reasonable cause for seeking permission to search in nighttime; [and]
(8) when the attorney for the Commonwealth is requesting that the affidavit(s) be sealed pursuant to Rule 211, state the facts and circumstances which are alleged to establish good cause for the sealing of the affidavit(s)[.]; and
(9) a certification that the application complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts regarding confidential information and documents.
Comment For the contents of the search warrant, see Rule 205.
While this rule continues to require written affidavits, the form of affidavit was deleted in 1984 because it is no longer necessary to control the specific form of written affidavit by rule.
The 2005 amendments to paragraph (6) recognize anticipatory search warrants. To satisfy the requirements of paragraph (6) when the warrant being requested is for a prospective event, the application for the search warrant also must include a statement explaining how the affiant knows that the items to be seized on a later occasion will be at the place specified. See Commonwealth v. Coleman, [574 Pa. 261,] 830 A.2d 554 (Pa. 2003), and Commonwealth v. Glass, [562 Pa. 187,] 754 A.2d 655 (Pa. 2000).
When the attorney for the Commonwealth is requesting that the search warrant affidavit(s) be sealed, the affidavit(s) in support of the search warrant must set forth the facts and circumstances the attorney for the Commonwealth alleges establish that there is good cause to seal the affidavit(s). See also Rule 211(B)(2). Pursuant to Rule 211(B)(1), when the attorney for the Commonwealth requests that the search warrant affidavit be sealed, the application for the search warrant must be made to a judge of the court of common pleas or to an appellate court justice or judge, who would be the issuing authority for purposes of this rule. For the procedures for sealing search warrant affidavit(s), see Rule 211.
See Rule 113.1 regarding the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and the requirements regarding filings and documents that contain confidential information.
Official Note: Previous Rule 2006 adopted October 17, 1973, effective 60 days hence; rescinded November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985. Present Rule 2006 adopted November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985; amended September 3, 1993, effective January 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 206 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended October 19, 2005, effective February 1, 2006; amended , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the October 19, 2005 amendments to paragraph (6) and the Comment published with the Court's Order at 35 Pa.B. 6087 (November 5, 2005).
Report explaining the proposed amendment regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
CHAPTER 5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES IN
COURT CASES
PART B(1). Complaint Procedures Rule 504. Contents of Complaint.
Every complaint shall contain:
* * * * *
(11) a verification by the affiant that the facts set forth in the complaint are true and correct to the affiant's personal knowledge, or information and belief, and that any false statements therein are made subject to the penalties of the Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities; [and]
(12) a certification that the complaint complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts regarding confidential information and documents; and
[(12)] (13) the signature of the affiant and the date of the execution of the complaint.
Comment This rule sets forth the required contents of all complaints whether the affiant is a law enforcement officer, a police officer, or a private citizen. When the affiant is a private citizen, the complaint must be submitted to an attorney for the Commonwealth for approval. See Rule 506. When the district attorney elects to proceed under Rule 507 (Approval of Police Complaints and Arrest Warrant Affidavits by Attorney for the Commonwealth—Local Option), the police officer must likewise submit the complaint for approval by an attorney for the Commonwealth.
Ordinarily, whenever a misdemeanor, felony, or murder is charged, any summary offense in such a case, if known at the time, should be charged in the same complaint, and the case should proceed as a court case under Chapter 5 Part B. See Commonwealth v. Caufman, [541 Pa. 299,] 662 A.2d 1050 (Pa. 1995) and Commonwealth v. Campana, [455 Pa. 622,] 304 A.2d 432 (Pa. 1973), vacated and remanded, 414 U.S. 808 (1973), on remand, [454 Pa. 233,] 314 A.2d 854 (Pa. 1974) (compulsory joinder rule). In judicial districts in which there is a traffic court established pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1301—1342, when a summary motor vehicle offense within the jurisdiction of the traffic court arises in the same criminal episode as another summary offense or a misdemeanor, felony, or murder offense, see 42 Pa.C.S. § 1302 and Commonwealth v. Masterson, [275 Pa. Super. 166], 418 A.2d 664 (Pa. Super. 1980).
Paragraph (8) requires the affiant who prepares the complaint to indicate on the complaint whether criminal laboratory services are requested in the case. This information is necessary to alert the magisterial district judge, the district attorney, and the court that the defendant in the case may be liable for a criminal laboratory user fee. See 42 Pa.C.S. § 1725.3 that requires a defendant to be sentenced to pay a criminal laboratory user fee in certain specified cases when laboratory services are required to prosecute the case.
The requirement that the affiant who prepares the complaint indicate whether the defendant has been fingerprinted as required by the Criminal History Record Information Act, 18 Pa.C.S. § 9112, is included so that the issuing authority knows whether it is necessary to issue a fingerprint order with the summons as required by Rule 510.
See Rule 113.1 regarding the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and the requirements regarding filings and documents that contain confidential information.
Official Note: Original Rule 104 adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; suspended January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970. New Rule 104 adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; renumbered Rule 132 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended October 22, 1981, effective January 1, 1982; amended November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985; amended July 25, 1994, effective January 1, 1995; renumbered Rule 104 and Comment revised August 9, 1994, effective January 1, 1995; renumbered Rule 504 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised March 9, 2006, effective September 1, 2006; amended July 10, 2008, effective February 1, 2009; amended , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the July 10, 2008 amendments adding new paragraph (9) requiring a notation concerning fingerprinting published with the Court's Order at 38 Pa.B. 3975 (July 26, 2008).
Report explaining the proposed amendment regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
PART B(3). Arrest Procedures in Court Cases
(a) Arrest Warrants Rule 513. Requirements for Issuance; Dissemination of Arrest Warrant Information.
* * * * *
Comment * * * * *
This rule does not preclude oral testimony before the issuing authority, but it requires that such testimony be reduced to an affidavit prior to issuance of a warrant. All affidavits in support of an application for an arrest warrant must be sworn to before the issuing authority prior to the issuance of the warrant. The language ''sworn to before the issuing authority'' contemplates, when advanced communication technology is used, that the affiant would not be in the physical presence of the issuing authority. See paragraph (B)(3).
All affidavits and applications filed pursuant to this rule are public records. However, in addition to restrictions placed by law and rule on the disclosure of confidential information, the filings required by this rule are subject to the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and may require further precautions, such as placing certain types of information in a ''Confidential Information Form'' or providing both a redacted and unredacted version of the filing. See Rule 113.1.
This rule carries over to the arrest warrant the requirement that the evidence presented to the issuing authority be reduced to writing and sworn to, and that only the writing is subsequently admissible to establish that there was probable cause. In these respects, the procedure is similar to that applicable to search warrants. See Rule 203.
For a discussion of the requirement of probable cause for the issuance of an arrest warrant, see Commonwealth v. Flowers, [24 Pa. Super. 198,] 369 A.2d 362 (Pa. Super. 1976).
The affidavit requirements of this rule are not intended to apply when an arrest warrant is to be issued for noncompliance with a citation, with a summons, or with a court order.
* * * * *
Official Note: Rule 119 adopted April 26, 1979, effective as to arrest warrants issued on or after July 1, 1979; Comment revised August 9, 1994, effective January 1, 1995; renumbered Rule 513 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002; amended December 23, 2013, effective March 1, 2014; Comment revised , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the December 23, 2013 amendments providing procedures for delay in dissemination and sealing of arrest warrant information published with the Court's Order at 44 Pa.B. 243 (January 11, 2014).
Report explaining the proposed Comment revision regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
PART F. Procedures Following a Case
Held for CourtRule 560. Information: Filing, Contents, Function.
* * * * *
(B) The information shall be signed by the attorney for the Commonwealth and shall be valid and sufficient in law if it contains:
* * * * *
(5) a plain and concise statement of the essential elements of the offense substantially the same as or cognate to the offense alleged in the complaint; [and]
(6) a concluding statement that ''all of which is against the Act of Assembly and the peace and dignity of the Commonwealth[.]''; and
(7) a certification that the information complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts regarding confidential information and documents.
(C) The information shall contain the official or customary citation of the statute and section thereof, or other provision of law that the defendant is alleged therein to have violated; but the omission of or error in such citation shall not affect the validity or sufficiency of the information.
(D) In all court cases tried on an information, the issues at trial shall be defined by such information.
Comment * * * * *
In any case in which there are summary offenses joined with the misdemeanor, felony, or murder charges that are held for court, the attorney for the Commonwealth must include the summary offenses in the information. See Commonwealth v. Hoffman, 406 Pa. Super. 583, 594 A.2d 772 (1991).
See Rule 113.1 regarding the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and the requirements regarding filings and documents that contain confidential information.
When there is an omission or error of the type referred to in paragraph (C), the information should be amended pursuant to Rule 564.
See Rule 543(D) for the procedures when a defendant fails to appear for the preliminary hearing. When the preliminary hearing is held in the defendant's absence and the case is held for court, the attorney for the Commonwealth should proceed as provided in this rule.
See Chapter 5 Part E for the procedures governing indicting grand juries. As explained in the Comment to Rule 556.11, when the grand jury indicts the defendant, this is the functional equivalent to holding the defendant for court following a preliminary hearing.
Official Note: Rule 225 adopted February 15, 1974, effective immediately; Comment revised January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended August 14, 1995, effective January 1, 1996; renumbered Rule 560 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised April 23, 2004, effective immediately; Comment revised August 24, 2004, effective August 1, 2005; Comment revised March 9, 2006, effective September 1, 2006; amended June 21, 2012, effective in 180 days; amended , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the June 21, 2012 amendments to paragraph (A) concerning indicting grand juries published with the Court's Order at 42 Pa.B. 4153 (July 7, 2012).
Report explaining the proposed amendment regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
PART G(1). Motion Procedures Rule 575. Motions and Answers.
(A) MOTIONS
(1) All motions shall be in writing, except as permitted by the court or when made in open court during a trial or hearing.
(2) A written motion shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) The motion shall be signed by the person or attorney making the motion. The signature of an attorney shall constitute a certification that the attorney has read the motion, that to the best of the attorney's knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support the motion, and that it is not interposed for delay. The motion also shall contain a certification that the motion complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts regarding confidential information and documents.
* * * * *
(B) ANSWERS
(1) Except as provided in Rule 906 (Answer to Petition for Post-Conviction Collateral Relief), an answer to a motion is not required unless the judge orders an answer in a specific case as provided in Rule 577. Failure to answer shall not constitute an admission of the facts alleged in the motion.
(2) A party may file a written answer, or, if a hearing or argument is scheduled, may respond orally at that time, even though an answer is not required.
(3) A written answer shall comply with the following requirements:
(a) The answer shall be signed by the person or attorney making the answer. The signature of an attorney shall constitute a certification that the attorney has read the answer, that to the best of the attorney's knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support the answer, and that it is not interposed for delay. The answer also shall contain a certification that the answer complies with the provisions of the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts regarding confidential information and documents.
* * * * *
Comment * * * * *
Paragraph (B)(1) changes prior practice by providing that the failure to answer a motion in a criminal case never constitutes an admission. Although this prohibition applies in all cases, even those in which an answer has been ordered in a specific case or is required by the rules, the judge would have discretion to impose other appropriate sanctions if a party fails to file an answer ordered by the judge or required by the rules.
See Rule 113.1 regarding the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and the requirements regarding filings and documents that contain confidential information.
Paragraph (C), added in 2006, sets forth the format requirements for all motions, answers, and briefs filed in criminal cases. These new format requirements are substantially the same as the format requirements in Pennsylvania Rule of Appellate Procedure 124(a) and Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 204.1.
* * * * *
Official Note: Former Rule 9020 adopted October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; renumbered Rule 574 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; rescinded March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004. Former Rule 9021 adopted October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; renumbered Rule 575 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Rules 574 and 575 combined as Rule 575 and amended March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended July 7, 2006, effective February 1, 2007; amended , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the July 7, 2006 addition of the format requirements in paragraph (C) published with the Court's Order at 36 Pa.B. 3809 (July 22, 2006).
Report explaining the proposed amendment regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
Rule 578. Omnibus Pretrial Motion for Relief.
* * * * *
Comment * * * * *
The omnibus pretrial motion rule is not intended to limit other types of motions, oral or written, made pretrial or during trial, including those traditionally called motions in limine, which may affect the admissibility of evidence or the resolution of other matters. The earliest feasible submissions and rulings on such motions are encouraged.
All motions filed pursuant to this rule are public records. However, in addition to restrictions placed by law and rule on the disclosure of confidential information, the motions are subject to the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and may require further precautions, such as placing certain types of information in a ''Confidential Information Form'' or providing both a redacted and unredacted version of the filing. See Rule 113.1.
See Rule 113.1 regarding the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts and the requirements regarding filings and documents that contain confidential information.
See Rule 556.4 for challenges to the array of an indicting grand jury and for motions to dismiss an information filed after a grand jury indicts a defendant.
Official Note: Formerly Rule 304, adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; amended and renumbered Rule 306 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 October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; Comment revised October 25, 1990, effective January 1, 1991; Comment revised August 12, 1993, effective September 1, 1993; renumbered Rule 578 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised June 21, 2012, effective in 180 days; Comment revised July 31, 2012, effective November 1, 2012; Comment revised , 2017, effective , 2017.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
* * * * *
Final Report explaining the July 31, 2012 Comment revision adding motions for transfer published with the Court's Order at 42 Pa.B. 5340 (August 18, 2012).
Report explaining the proposed Comment revision regarding the Court's public access policy published for comment at 47 Pa.B. 4679 (August 12, 2017).
REPORT
Proposed New Rule 113.1; Proposed Amendments to Pa.Rs.Crim.P.206, 504, 560 and 575; Proposed Revision of the Comment to Pa.Rs.Crim.P.
513 and 578
Public Access Policy The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania recently adopted the new Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Case Records of the Appellate and Trial Courts (hereafter ''the new Policy''). The Court previously had adopted other policies governing public access to case records. These are: (1) the Electronic Case Record Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania (hereafter ''the Electronic Records Policy'') that provides for access to the statewide case management systems' web docket sheets and requests for bulk data; and (2) the Public Access Policy of the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania: Official Case Records of the Magisterial District Courts (hereafter ''the MDJ Records Policy'') that provides for access to case records of the magisterial district courts maintained in a paper format. The new Policy, in essence, governs the paper case records of the common pleas and appellate courts and provides the final portion of the Court's policy on public access to case records.
In January 2017, the Court sent a directive to all of the Procedural Rules Committees to consider correlative rule changes to implement the new Policy. In particular, the Court requested that the Committees examine rules that may require filings contain confidential information in light of the new Policy's restrictions on access to this information. The rule changes proposed here is the product of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee's examination resulting from the Court's directive. These proposed rules are being published in conjunction with proposals from the other Rules Committees
The new Policy provides that case records generally are publicly accessible but contains provisions that restrict certain types of information from being included in filings. This restricted information includes personal and financial information such as Social Security numbers, financial account numbers, driver license numbers, SID numbers, minors' personal information, victims' address and contact information, etc. This restricted information is prohibited by the new Policy from being included in filings unless it is contained in a ''Confidential Information Form'' or provided in both a redacted and unredacted version of the filing. Under the new Policy, the burden of ensuring that the confidential information or documents are filed in the proper manner rests with the filer and the court or record custodian will not review or redact the filings. The new Policy recognizes that public access may also be restricted by a sealing or protective order or ''by federal law, state law, or state court rule. . . .''
Given the importance of the new Policy and the need for those working in the criminal justice system to comply with its provisions, the Committee concluded that it would be beneficial to have a specific rule referencing the policy. This rule would be numbered ''Rule 113.1,'' so that it would fall after Rule 113 (Criminal Case File and Docket Entries) since both rules deal with provisions applicable to all case records. The proposed new rule would alert filing parties to the requirements of the new Policy, in particular the provisions regarding the inclusion of confidential information.
New Rule 113.1 would apply to filings in court cases with issuing authorities as well as the clerk of courts. The Committee understands that the new Policy is intended to apply only to records in the courts of common pleas and appellate courts since the MDJ Records Policy already applies to case records in magisterial district courts. There are some differences between these policies. In particular, the new Policy is more detailed and explicit in the types of information that are prohibited from being included in case filings. It's the Committee's understanding that the MDJ Records Policy will be updated at some point in the future to comport with the provision in the new Policy. However, the Committee is concerned that most initial filings in criminal cases, such as criminal complaints and affidavits of probable cause, are filed in the magisterial district courts by non-lawyer police officers. The Committee believes that the provisions of the new Policy, where they differ from the existing provisions of the MDJ Records Policy, should be made applicable to filings in the magisterial district courts. The Committee is soliciting input on this point.
Due to the fact that the new Policy reflects a strong commitment to public access to most filings, the Committee also believes that filers should be more attuned to this accessibility and should limit the inclusion of personal information where possible. Therefore, the Comment to proposed Rule 113.1 would contain an admonition that personal information should be included in a filing only where necessary and consideration given to the use of confidential information forms or sealing orders.
The Committee also noted that the restrictions on inclusion of confidential information contained in the Policy did not apply to filing by the courts but only to those made by the parties. The Committee believes that courts should comply voluntarily with similar restrictions on the inclusion of confidential information in court documents and so have included aspirational language in the Comment to proposed Rule 113.1 that a court should be careful about including such information in its filings.
Another area of concern to the Committee was the requirement that a certification of compliance with the Policy be included in most filings. The Committee believes that filers should be alerted to this requirement and its import. The Committee therefore is proposing to add to the rules that contain ''contents'' provisions for documents filed by the parties a cross-reference to the new Policy and the certification requirement in particular. These cross-references would be placed in the following rules:
206. Contents of Application for Search Warrant.
504. Contents of Complaint.
560. Information: Filing, Contents, Function.
575. Motions and Answers.These rules contain the most clearly defined contents provisions as well as are some of the most significant filing rules.
Arrest warrant information is a bit more problematic. Unlike search warrants which have Rule 206 describing the necessary contents, Rule 513 (Requirements for Issuance; Dissemination of Arrest Warrant Information), the main rule for the issuance of arrest warrants, does not provide detailed contents for an arrest warrant application. The Committee concluded that an alert to the requirements of the new Policy should be added to this rule and is therefore proposing a detailed cross-reference in the Comment. A similar cross-reference also would be added to Rule 578 (Omnibus Pretrial Motion for Relief). While not a content rule, it does represent a significant number of the filing in criminal cases. The Committee concluded that a more detailed cross-reference to the policy be included here.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 17-1334. Filed for public inspection August 11, 2017, 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.
