Com. v. Ephault, B.
Com. v. Ephault, B. No. 3248 EDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | May 26, 2017Background
- Appellee Brigid M. Ephault was arrested on Aug. 23, 2015 for DUI and related charges; the Commonwealth sought a bench trial.
- Trial was originally set for March 29, 2016, but was continued multiple times at the parties' requests and rescheduled to the October 25, 2016 trial term.
- The Commonwealth twice requested continuances earlier in 2016; it represented in June 2016 that the Commonwealth’s affiant (Trooper Thomas) was available for the October 25 date.
- On October 4, 2016 — shortly before trial — the Commonwealth filed a third continuance request because its sole affiant/witness was reportedly unavailable due to a prepaid vacation.
- The trial court denied the third continuance, finding the Commonwealth lacked due diligence and had either misled the court about prior confirmation or failed to keep in contact with its witness; the Commonwealth appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in denying the Commonwealth’s motion to continue the bench trial on Oct. 4, 2016 | Commonwealth: denial was erroneous because its sole witness (affiant) was unavailable and it only learned of the conflict shortly before trial | Ephault/Trial Court: Commonwealth failed to exercise due diligence in securing witness availability after earlier representations that the witness was available | Trial court did not abuse its discretion; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Hansley, 24 A.3d 410 (Pa. Super. 2011) (standard for reviewing continuance denials; abuse of discretion and prejudice required for reversal)
- Commonwealth v. Norton, 144 A.3d 139 (Pa. Super. 2016) (trial courts need latitude in scheduling; continuances disfavored absent compelling reasons)
- Commonwealth v. Moir, 766 A.2d 1253 (Pa. Super. 2000) (appeal from denial of reconsideration is improper)
- Birchfield v. North Dakota, 136 S. Ct. 2160 (2016) (warrantless blood tests incident to arrest for drunk driving not permitted; relevant to Commonwealth's decision not to call toxicologist)