Com. v. Jackson, D., 725 WDA 2021

On May 24, 2021, Dana Romer Jackson pled guilty to driving while operating privilege is suspended or revoked (second offense) under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 1543(b)(1)(ii).
Statutory penalty language provided a $1,000 fine and imprisonment "for not less than 90 days."
The trial court sentenced Jackson to a $1,000 fine and 90 days of house arrest.
Jackson appealed, arguing the sentencing provision is unconstitutionally vague under Commonwealth v. Eid.
The trial court agreed that the statutory language is identical to the provision invalidated in Eid and recommended vacating the 90-day house arrest while affirming the conviction and fine.
The Superior Court affirmed the conviction and fine, vacated the house-arrest portion of the sentence, and remanded for further proceedings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the mandatory "not less than 90 days" imprisonment in § 1543(b)(1)(ii) is unconstitutionally vague	Commonwealth: statute authorizes a 90‑day minimum and the sentence is lawful	Jackson: language is vague and inoperable under Eid; sentence illegal	Court: statute's "not less than 90 days" is unconstitutionally vague; conviction and $1,000 fine affirmed; incarceration (house arrest) vacated; remanded

Commonwealth v. Eid, 249 A.3d 1030 (Pa. 2021) (held statutory phrase "not less than 90 days" lacks a maximum and is unconstitutionally vague; vacated incarceration portion)
Commonwealth v. Ramos, 197 A.3d 766 (Pa. Super. 2018) (explains de novo review for legality of sentence; illegal sentences must be vacated)