THE COURTS
Title 234--RULES
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
[234 PA. CODE CHS. 1 AND 5]
Order Promulgating New Rule 150 and Amending Rules 536 and 543; No. 335 Criminal Procedural Rules; Doc. No. 2
[36 Pa.B. 181] The Criminal Procedural Rules Committee has prepared a Final Report explaining the December 30, 2005 promulgation of new Rule of Criminal Procedure 150 and the amendments to Rules of Criminal Procedure 536 and 543. The changes, which will be effective August 1, 2006, establish the procedures to be followed after a bench warrant is executed in a court case. The Final Report follows the Court's Order.
Order Per Curiam:
Now, this 30th day of December, 2005, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee; the proposal having been published before adoption at 34 Pa.B. 1429 (March 13, 2004) and in the Atlantic Reporter (Second Series Advance Sheets, Vol. 841), 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:
(1) New Rule of Criminal Procedure 150 is promulgated; and
(2) Rules of Criminal Procedure 536 and 543 are amended, all in the following form.
This Order shall be processed in accordance with Pa.R.J.A. 103(b), and shall be effective August 1, 2006.
Mr. Justice Nigro did not participate in the decision of this matter.
Annex A
TITLE 234. RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 1. SCOPE OF RULES, CONSTRUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, LOCAL RULES
PART E. Miscellaneous Warrants Rule 150. Bench Warrants.
(A) In a court case when a bench warrant is executed, the case is to proceed in accordance with the following procedures.
(1) When a defendant or witness is arrested pursuant to a bench warrant, he or she shall be taken without unnecessary delay for a hearing on the bench warrant. The hearing shall be conducted by the judicial officer who issued the bench warrant, or, another judicial officer designated by the president judge or by the president judge's designee to conduct bench warrant hearings.
(2) In the discretion of the judicial officer, the bench warrant hearing may be conducted using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication.
(3) When the individual is arrested in the county of issuance, if the bench warrant hearing cannot be conducted promptly after the arrest, the defendant or witness shall be lodged in the county jail pending the hearing. The authority in charge of the county jail promptly shall notify the court that the individual is being held pursuant to the bench warrant.
(4) When the individual is arrested outside the county of issuance, the authority in charge of the county jail promptly shall notify the proper authorities in the county of issuance that the individual is being held pursuant to the bench warrant.
(5) The bench warrant hearing shall be conducted without unnecessary delay after the individual is lodged in the jail of the county of issuance on that bench warrant.
(a) When the bench warrant is issued by the supervising judge of a ''multi-county'' investigating grand jury, the individual shall be detained only until the supervising judge is available to conduct the bench warrant hearing.
(b) In all other cases, the individual shall not be detained without a bench warrant hearing on that bench warrant longer than 72 hours, or the close of the next business day if the 72 hours expires on a non-business day.
(6) At the conclusion of the bench warrant hearing following the disposition of the matter, the judicial officer immediately shall vacate the bench warrant.
(7) If a bench warrant hearing is not held within the time limits in paragraph (A)(5)(b), the bench warrant shall expire by operation of law.
(B) As used in this rule, ''judicial officer'' is limited to the magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge who issued the bench warrant, or the magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge designated by the president judge or by the president judge's designee to conduct bench warrant hearings, or in Philadelphia, trial commissioners.
Comment This rule addresses only the procedures to be followed after a bench warrant is executed, and does not apply to execution of bench warrants outside the Commonwealth, which are governed by the extradition procedures in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9101 et seq., or to warrants issued in connection with probation or parole proceedings.
Paragraph (A)(2) permits the bench warrant hearing to be conducted using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication, which is a form of advanced communication technology. See Rule 103. Utilizing this technology will aid the court in complying with this rule, and in ensuring individuals arrested on bench warrants are not detained unnecessarily.
Once a bench warrant is executed and the defendant is taken into custody, the bench warrant no longer is valid.
To ensure compliance with the prompt bench warrant hearing requirement, the president judge or the president judge's designee may designate only a magisterial district judge to cover for magisterial district judges or a common pleas court judge to cover for common pleas court judges. See also Rule 132 for the temporary assignment of magisterial district judges. In Philadelphia, the current practice of designating trial commissioners to conduct bench warrant hearings is acknowledged in paragraph (B).
It is expected that the practices in some judicial districts of a common pleas court judge (1) indicating on a bench warrant the judge has issued that the bench warrant is a ''judge only'' bench warrant, or (2) who knows he or she will be unavailable asking another common pleas court judge to handle his or her cases during the common pleas court judge's absence, would continue.
Paragraph (A)(5)(a) recognizes the procedural and substantive differences between ''multi-county'' investigating grand jury proceedings and all other proceedings in the court of common pleas, including a county investigating grand jury, by eliminating the time limit for conducting the bench warrant hearing when the bench warrant is issued by the multi-county investigating grand jury supervising judge. See Rules 240--244 and 42 Pa.C.S. § 4544. When the supervising judge issues a bench warrant, the bench warrant hearing must be conducted expeditiously when the supervising judge is available.
Paragraph (A)(6) requires the judicial officer to vacate the bench warrant at the conclusion of the bench warrant hearing. The current practice in some judicial districts of having the clerk of courts cancel the bench warrant upon receipt of a return of service is consistent with this paragraph, as long as the clerk of courts promptly provides notice of the return of service to the issuing judge.
It is incumbent upon the president judge or the president judge's designee to establish procedures for the monitoring of the time individuals are detained pending their bench warrant hearing.
For the procedures concerning violation of the conditions of bail, see Chapter 5 Part C.
As used in this rule, ''court'' includes magisterial district judge courts.
For the bench warrant procedures in summary cases, see Rules 430(B) and 431(C).
For the arrest warrants that initiate proceedings in court cases, see Chapter 5, Part B(3)(a), Rules 513, 514, 515, 516, 517, and 518. For the arrest warrants that initiate proceedings in summary cases, see Chapter 4, Part D(1), Rules 430(A) and 431(B).
Official Note: Adopted December 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006.
Committee Explanatory Reports:
Final Report explaining new Rule 150 providing procedures for bench warrants published with the Court's Order at 36 Pa.B. 184, 2006 (January 14, 2006).
CHAPTER 5. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES IN
COURT CASES
PART C(2). General Procedures in all Bail Cases Rule 536. Procedures Upon Violation of Conditions: Revocation of Release and Forfeiture; Bail Pieces; Exoneration of Surety.
(A) SANCTIONS
(1) Revocation of Release
* * * * * (b) When a violation of a condition occurs, the bail authority may issue a bench warrant for the defendant's arrest. When the bench warrant is executed, the bench warrant proceedings shall be conducted pursuant to Rule 150.
* * * * * (d) [When the arrest warrant issued pursuant to paragraph (A)(1)(b) is executed, the defendant shall not be released except upon order of the person who issued the warrant, or, if that person is unavailable, upon order of the president judge of the judicial district or a judge designated by the president judge.
(e)] When the bail authority changes the conditions of the bail bond and/or revokes the defendant's release, the bail authority shall state in writing or on the record the reasons for so doing.
(2) Forfeiture
* * * * * (e) When a [district justice] magisterial district judge orders bail forfeited pursuant to this rule, the [district justice] magisterial district judge shall generate a check in the amount of the bail monies he or she has on deposit in the case, and shall send the check and a copy of the docket transcript to the clerk of courts for processing and disbursement as provided by law.
* * * * *
Comment * * * * * Paragraph (A)(1)(b) was amended and paragraph (A)(1)(d) was deleted in 2005 to make it clear that a warrant for the arrest of the defendant for failure to comply with a condition of bail is a bench warrant. For the procedures when a paragraph (A)(1)(b) bench warrant is executed, see Rule 150 (Bench Warrants).
Once bail has been modified by a common pleas judge pursuant to Rule 529, only the common pleas judge subsequently may change the conditions of release, even in cases that are pending before a [district justice] magisterial district judge. See Rules 543 and 529.
* * * * * Official Note: Former Rule 4016 adopted July 23, 1973, effective 60 days hence, replacing prior Rule 4012; Comment revised January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; rescinded September 13, 1995, effective January 1, 1996, and replaced by Rule 4016. Present Rule 4016 adopted September 13, 1995, effective January 1, 1996. The January 1, 1996 effective dates extended to April 1, 1996; the April 1, 1996 effective dates extended to July 1, 1996; renumbered Rule 536 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; Comment revised August 24, 2004, effective August 1, 2005; amended December 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006.
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. [1477] 1478 (March 18, 2000).
* * * * * Final Report explaining the December 30, 2005 amendments concerning bench warrants published with the Court's Order at 36 Pa.B. 184 (January 14, 2006).
PART D. Proceedings in Court Cases Before
Issuing AuthoritiesRule 543. Disposition of Case at Preliminary Hearing.
* * * * * (D) In any case in which the defendant fails to appear for the preliminary hearing:
* * * * * (2) If the issuing authority finds that the defendant's absence is without good cause and after notice, the absence shall be deemed a waiver by the defendant of the right to be present at any further proceedings before the issuing authority. In these cases, the issuing authority shall:
* * * * * (c) if the case is held for court or if the preliminary hearing is continued, issue a bench warrant for the arrest of the defendant.
(3) When the issuing authority issues a bench warrant pursuant to paragraph (D)(2)(C), the issuing authority retains jurisdiction to dispose of the warrant until:
* * * * * Upon receipt of notice that the arraignment has occurred or a bench warrant has been issued, the issuing authority promptly shall recall and cancel the issuing authority's bench warrant.
Comment * * * * * When a defendant fails to appear for the preliminary hearing, before proceeding with the case as provided in paragraph (D), the issuing authority must determine (1) whether the defendant received notice of the time, date, and place of the preliminary hearing either in person at a preliminary arraignment as provided in Rule 540[(E)](F)(2) or in a summons served as provided in Rule 511, and (2) whether the defendant had good cause explaining the absence.
* * * * * Paragraph (D)(2)(c) requires the issuing authority to issue [an arrest] a bench warrant if the case is held for court or when the preliminary hearing is continued.
Pursuant to paragraph (D)(3), the defendant must be taken before the issuing authority for resolution of the bench warrant, counsel, and bail in those cases in which a defendant is apprehended on the issuing authority's bench warrant prior to the arraignment or the issuance of a common pleas judge's bench warrant. See Rule 150 for the procedures in a court case after a bench warrant is executed.
* * * * * Official Note: Original Rule 123, adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965, suspended January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970. New Rule 123 adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; renumbered Rule 143 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended August 9, 1994, effective January 1, 1995; amended September 13, 1995, effective January 1, 1996. The January 1, 1996 effective date extended to April 1, 1996; the April 1, 1996 effective date extended to July 1, 1996; renumbered Rule 142 October 8, 1999, effective January 1, 2000; renumbered Rule 543 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended August 24, 2004, effective August 1, 2005; amended December 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006.
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. [1477] 1478 (March 18, 2000).
* * * * * Final Report explaining the December 30, 2005 changes adding references to bench warrants published with the Court's Order at 36 Pa.B. 184 (January 14, 2006).
FINAL REPORT1
New Pa.R.Crim.P. 150, Amendments to Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 536 and 543
Procedures when Bench Warrant is Issued On December 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006, upon the recommendation of the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, the Court adopted new Pa.R.Crim.P. 150 (Bench Warrants) and amended Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 536 (Procedures Upon Violation of Conditions: Revocation of Release and Forfeiture; Bail Pieces; Exoneration of Surety) and 543 (Disposition of Case at Preliminary Hearing). The changes establish the procedures to be followed after a bench warrant is executed in a court case.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Criminal Procedural Rules Committee undertook consideration of a separate bench warrant rule in response to the Committee's review of the bench warrant and arrest warrant forms being developed for use by the Common Pleas Case Management System (CPCMS) and some questions from the CPCMS Staff concerning bench warrants. In particular, they asked whether there should be a time limit on how long a defendant may be confined after being arrested on the bench warrant before being brought before a judge for a bench warrant hearing similar to what is occurring in some judicial districts. During this consideration, the members opined, based on their own experiences representing clients who have been the subject of bench warrants, that bench warrant practice is one area of criminal practice that is fraught with abuses, particularly with regard to the time the arrested individual spends in custody pending a bench warrant hearing. They have found that frequently the judge who issues the bench warrant is not given notice that the individual has been arrested on that bench warrant, there does not appear to be a procedure for scheduling the bench warrant hearing, and if there is a scheduling procedure, rarely does it provide for a prompt hearing. The members also noted because there are no statewide bench warrant rules, there has been a proliferation of local bench warrant rules and practices.2
The Committee also researched other states' rules and statutes to see whether there are any ''model'' bench warrant rules and what provisions these rules or statutes include. We found very few rules or statutes governing bench warrants specifically, with most only providing procedures for arrest warrants in general. The Committee also reviewed all the Pennsylvania Rules of Procedure and found that only Pa.R.C.P. 1910.13-1 (Failure or Refusal to Appear Pursuant to Order of Court. Bench Warrant) sets forth procedures following the issuance of a bench warrant.3
After completing our review and thoroughly discussing the issue, the Committee agreed there should be a new Rule of Criminal Procedure governing the procedures following the issuance of a bench warrant. The members also agreed the proposed new rule, as more fully explained below, should:
* apply both to defendants and witnesses, including investigating grand jury witnesses;
* make clear that magisterial district judges would proceed under this new rule only when handling court cases, otherwise they would proceed under the summary case bench warrant rule procedures, Rules 430 and 431;
* ensure the court receives notice when an individual is arrested on a bench warrant;
* require that the magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge who issued the bench warrant is the judicial officer before whom the defendant or witness should be taken when arrested;
* provide a procedure for coverage when these ''issuing authorities'' are unavailable, and that should be accomplished by the president judge or the president judge's designee designating another magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge to provide coverage;
* make clear that only another magisterial district judge may cover for a magisterial district judge and only another common pleas court judge may cover for a common pleas court judge;
* require that individuals arrested on a bench warrant must be brought before the issuing magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge or designated magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge as soon as reasonably possible following the arrest and establish time limits on the detention of an individual without a bench warrant hearing;
* encourage the use of advanced communication technology for the bench warrant hearing, a tool that will be helpful in ensuring prompt bench warrant hearings;
* provide that the bench warrant be vacated at the conclusion of the bench warrant hearing;
* not address when bench warrants may be issued.4
II. DISCUSSION
A. Placement
The new bench warrant rule was placed in the general provisions section of the rules, Chapter 1, because the rule applies to bench warrants issued by both judges of the common pleas court in court cases and magisterial district judges when handling a court case. In order to accommodate warrants in this Chapter, a new subsection, Part E, has been created. This new subsection is titled ''Miscellaneous Warrants.'' The Committee reasoned the new section should not be limited to bench warrants, but should be broad enough in scope to address procedures related to other types of warrants that are not for instituting proceedings,5 if such other rule procedures become necessary or desirable. The new bench warrant rule is the first rule in this new subsection, numbered Rule 150.
B. New Pa.R.Crim.P. 150
1. Scope
New Rule 150 applies to warrants in court cases that do not institute proceedings, called ''bench warrants,'' and sets forth the procedures to follow after a bench warrant is executed.6 In addition, the rule applies to bench warrants for both defendants and witnesses, including investigating grand jury witnesses. The rule, however, does not apply to bench warrants executed outside the Commonwealth, which are covered by the extradition procedures in 42 Pa.C.S. § 9101 et seq., or to warrants issued in probation and parole proceedings.
2. Terminology
The Committee discussed, in the context of a bench warrant proceeding, how to refer to the magisterial district judges and common pleas court judges who would issue bench warrants and preside at bench warrant hearings. We considered and rejected using ''issuing authority,'' because this term has a long history in the rules as being applicable to the judicial officer who either issues process to institute proceedings, issues search warrants, or presides over summary proceedings. Because some members expressed concern about the potential confusion using ''issuing authority'' in the Rule 150 bench warrant context would cause, the Committee agreed instead to use ''judicial officer'' to encompass the presiding magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge who issued the bench warrant or the magisterial district judge or common pleas court judge designated by the president judge to conduct the bench warrant hearings when either the presiding magisterial district judge or the presiding common pleas court judge is unavailable. The use of ''judicial officer'' in Rule 150 is explained in paragraph (B).
3. Paragraph (A)
Paragraph (A) establishes the scope of the rule ''when a bench warrant is executed,'' and enumerates the procedures to follow after the execution of the bench warrant.
Paragraph (A)(1) requires that the individual arrested on a bench warrant be taken without unnecessary delay for a bench warrant hearing before the judicial officer who issued the bench warrant. To ensure there are prompt bench warrant hearings, paragraph (A)(1) also includes the requirement that the president judge, or the president judge's designee, designate a ''replacement'' judicial officer to conduct the hearing if the issuing judicial officer is unavailable. The fifth paragraph of the Comment favorably acknowledges the practice in some judicial districts of permitting a judge who will be unavailable to make arrangements with another judge to handle his or her cases while the judge is unavailable.
Paragraph (A)(2) encourages the use of ''two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication'' to conduct the bench warrant hearing. This technology is another means of ensuring prompt bench warrant hearings, especially in situations in which an individual is arrested on a bench warrant in another county. The second paragraph of the Comment explains the two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication is a form of ''advanced communication technology'' as defined in Rule 103.
Paragraphs (A)(3) and (A)(4) set forth procedures when the individual is arrested on the bench warrant. When the arrest is made in the county of issuance, paragraph (A)(3) requires that the arrested individual be lodged in the county jail pending the hearing and the authority in charge of the jail promptly must notify the court of the arrest and detention. If the individual is arrested outside the county of issuance, paragraph (A)(4) requires that the authority in charge of the county jail in which the individual is lodged promptly notify the proper authorities in the county of issuance. Although ideally all bench warrant hearings should be conducted promptly after the individual is arrested, the Committee recognized the demands on the courts do not always afford this opportunity. At the same time, the Committee noted that, under current practices, frequently, when a hearing cannot be conducted ''promptly after the arrest,'' arrested individuals remain incarcerated for long periods of time without receiving a bench warrant hearing. Based on our research, the members' own experiences in practice, and the other information we gathered, the Committee concluded that some time limits on the post-bench warrant arrest detention should be established. In considering what kind of time limits to establish, the Committee extensively debated the impact of any time limits on these cases, noting in particular the differences between cases in which the individual is arrested within the county of issuance and cases in which the individual is arrested outside the county of issuance. Taking note of the scheduling demands in the judicial districts, as well as the fact that the 72-hour time limit in Pa.R.C.P. 1910.13-1(d), to our knowledge, has not created an undue burden on the judicial districts, the Committee agreed this time limit is reasonable in the cases in which the individual is arrested within the county of issuance. The Committee also discussed at length whether to accommodate the scenario in which the 72 hours ends on a holiday or weekend. Although concerned about building into the rule any unnecessary delay, the Committee realized judicial resources would not be able to provide adequate coverage during these time periods, and ultimately agreed the 72-hour limit would be extended to the next business day when the 72 hours expires on a non-business day. See paragraph (A)(5)(b).
A more complicated issue concerned the situation when the individual is arrested outside the judicial district of issuance. The members expressed concern that the 72-hour time limit was unrealistic given the difficulties in some cases of retrieving an individual from another judicial district, particularly when the judicial district of arrest is a great distance away from the judicial district of issuance. Initially, the Committee considered a 144-hour time limit would be reasonable and would provide sufficient time for the judicial district of issuance to make arrangements for the individual's return without unnecessarily prolonging the individual's detention. Ultimately, after a lengthy debate and after reviewing the publication responses questioning the practicality of such a provision, the Committee determined that the 72-hour time-limit should apply to both in-county and out-of-county bench warrant arrests, but in out-of-county bench warrant arrests, the time would begin to run from the time the individual is lodged in the jail of the county of issuance. See paragraph (A)(5)(b).
In response to some publication comments, the Committee examined the practices of the multi-county and statewide investigating grand juries. The correspondents had noted that the supervising judge is rarely available when the grand jury is not in session and rarely is from the judicial district in which the grand jury is convened. In addition, given the nature of the investigating grand jury and the confidentiality of its proceedings, it would be inappropriate to have a substitute judge designated the judge to conduct these bench warrant hearings. In view of these considerations, the Committee agreed to exempt the multi-county and statewide investigating grand juries from the 72-hour time limit in Rule 150, but to require that the bench warrant hearing be conducted expeditiously after the supervising judge is available. See paragraph (A)(5)(a). Further elaboration concerning grand juries and bench warrants is set forth in the sixth paragraph of the Comment.
Paragraph (A)(6) is taken from Civil Rule 1910.13-1(c), and requires that the bench warrant be vacated at the conclusion of the bench warrant hearing following the disposition of the matter. The Committee agreed a comparable provision in the Criminal Rules' bench warrant rule that would require the judicial officer to dispose of the bench warrant proceeding as well as vacate the warrant makes sense in view of the ongoing problems concerning adequate warrant controls and ensuring defunct warrants are removed from the national computer systems. The Comment reiterates that once the bench warrant is executed and the individual is taken into custody, the bench warrant is no longer valid. In addition, the Comment recognizes the existing practice in some judicial districts of having the clerk of courts cancel the bench warrant when he or she receives a return of service, but cautions in these circumstances, the clerk promptly must provide notice of the return of service to the judge who issued the warrant.
Another issue the Committee had some difficulty with concerned what should occur when the time limits in paragraph (A)(5)(b) expire. The Committee majority agreed that, to have any ''teeth,'' the rule should include an automatic release from custody at the expiration of the time limit, and to accomplish this, the rule should provide that the bench warrant expires by operation of law. See paragraph (A)(7). A related issue that concerned the members was how to ensure the court knows the individual is eligible for release and is released promptly when the time limit expires. The Committee agreed it is the responsibility of someone in the court system-judge, court administrator, clerk of courts, or even counsel-to monitor the time and make sure the jail is told to release the individual. This point is emphasized in the eighth paragraph of the Comment.
Finally, the Comment also includes (1) cross-references to the summary case bench warrant rules, Rules 430(B) and 431(C); to the summary case and court case rules governing arrest warrants that initiate proceedings to clearly distinguish those procedures from the new bench warrant procedures; and to Chapter 5 Part B concerning violation of the conditions of bail; and (2) an explanation that ''court'' as used in Rule 150 is not limited to courts of record but also includes magisterial district judge courts.
III. CORRELATIVE CHANGES
A. Rule 536
As the Committee was working on Rule 150, the issue of bail frequently arose, with the members concerned about how Rule 150 would work in conjunction with Rule 536 (Procedures Upon Violation of Conditions: Revocation of Release and Forfeiture; Bail Pieces; Exoneration of Surety). Of particular concern was Rule 536(A)(1)(b) and (d), which provide, inter alia, that the bail authority may issue a warrant for the defendant's arrest and the defendant would not be released except upon order of the issuing bail authority or, if unavailable, the order of the president judge or the president judge's designee. The Committee reviewed the rule history. In the January 1973 Submission Statement to the Court, the Committee explained
Rule 4016 [now 536] authorizes the issuing authority or court to issue ''appropriate process'' e.g.; a warrant, to bring the defendant before it, an aspect of procedure entirely overlooked by the present Rules. The term ''bench warrant'' was explicitly avoided by your Committee and use made of ''appropriate process'' because it was felt that the term ''bench warrant'' might be thought by some as applicable only to the power of judges of courts of record. This is only a point of nomenclature, however, and there is no question that the effect of any such warrant or process would be the same.
In view of this rule history and the fact that Rule 150 makes it clear the bench warrant may be issued by both magisterial district judges and judges of the courts of common pleas in court cases, Rule 536(A)(1)(b) has been amended to make it clear that the warrant being issued is a bench warrant. In addition, a second sentence has been added to paragraph (A)(1)(b) explaining that ''when the bench warrant is executed, the bench warrant proceedings shall be pursuant to Rule 150.''
Because Rule 150(A)(1) sets forth the requirements that the issuing judge or a designated issuing judge must conduct the bench warrant hearing, Rule 536(A)(1)(d) has been deleted as no longer necessary.
B. Rule 543
Rule 543 provides the procedures when a defendant fails to appear for a preliminary hearing. Paragraph (D)(2)(c) requires the issuing authority to ''issue a warrant for the arrest of the defendant.'' This warrant is a bench warrant within the context of Rule 150. Accordingly, all the references to ''warrants'' in Rule 543 have been changed to ''bench warrants.'' In addition, a cross-reference to Rule 150 has been added to the Rule 543 Comment.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 06-54. Filed for public inspection January 13, 2006, 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 In many of these cases, in implementing the local rules and practices, the judicial districts have not complied with Rule 105 (Local Rules) making the local rules difficult to find and monitor.
3 Rule 1910.13-1 provides, inter alia,
(c) Upon appearance in court by a party on the matter underlying the bench warrant, the bench warrant shall be vacated forthwith and the notice shall be given to all computer networks into which the bench warrant has been entered.
(d) The bench warrant shall direct that if the court is unavailable at the time of the party's arrest, the party shall be lodged in the county jail until such time as court is opened for business. The authority in charge of the county jail must promptly notify the sheriff's office and the director of the domestic relations section that defendant is being held pursuant to the bench warrant. Under no circumstances shall the party remain in the county jail longer than seventy-two hours prior to hearing.4 In discussing this issue, the members noted there are so many instances when the judiciary issue bench warrants that it would be impossible to adequately address this in a rule. At the same time, some members expressed concerns that in some cases, bench warrants are being issued in inappropriate situations. Ultimately, after concluding that with the time limits being built into the new rule, judges will pay more attention to when they issue bench warrants, the Committee agreed the new rule should cover only the procedures once a bench warrant has been executed.
5 The procedures for instituting criminal proceedings by arrest warrant are governed by Rules 430 and 431 in summary cases and Rules 513-518 in court cases.
6 See Rules 430(B) and 431(C) for the procedures for bench warrants in summary cases.
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.
