Com. v. Lear, J., 290 A.3d 709

Background

Series of thefts of snowplow equipment beginning Oct 2019; on Jan 11, 2020 Lear threw a bicycle while fleeing police and injured Officer Christopher Daniel.
Jan 13, 2020: Warminster PD stopped a silver rental-registered sedan for expired registration; driver and passenger gave names/dates but no ID and were notably nervous.
Officers suspected a stolen wallet in the passenger’s pocket; the passenger produced a wallet, Lear intermittently obstructed the ID, then extended the wallet outside the car window; Officer Leporace seized it and identified Lear from the ID.
A task force later identified Lear for the thefts; arrest warrant executed May 21, 2020 by U.S. Marshals. At arrest Lear told a marshal to return cash to his grandmother inside the house; the marshal entered through an ajar door, observed items in plain view (dirt bike, tools), and those observations helped secure a search warrant.
Lear filed suppression motions (arguing unlawful prolongation of the stop and lack of consent to entry) and a Rule 600 motion; bench trial Nov 1, 2021 resulted in convictions for aggravated assault and theft; sentence Feb 16, 2022; Lear appealed.

Issues

Issue	Commonwealth's Argument	Lear's Argument	Held
Whether officer lacked reasonable suspicion to prolong Jan 13 traffic stop and whether seizure of wallet was unlawful	Officer had reasonable suspicion from nervousness, evasive answers, inconsistent IDs, and passenger’s concealment to transform stop into investigatory detention and to seize wallet once extended	Officer unlawfully prolonged stop beyond citation purpose; seizure of wallet exceeded investigatory scope	Denied suppression: court found reasonable suspicion to continue detention; wallet seizure permissible when extended outside the window and ownership was disputed
Whether U.S. Marshal’s entry into house was nonconsensual and tainted subsequent search warrant	Lear expressly told marshal to return cash to his grandmother inside the house; marshal reasonably construed that as consent to enter; plain-view observations were lawful	Lear argues he did not give explicit, unequivocal consent for entry and that observations cannot support warrant if entry lacked consent	Denied suppression: court found Lear’s statement amounted to voluntary consent to return money and marshal’s plain-view observations were lawful
Whether Rule 600 dismissal was required for delay beyond 365 days due to Montgomery County judicial emergency	County orders classified emergency delays as court postponements; because county did not continue an unqualified suspension after May 31, 2020, excluded time depends on Commonwealth’s due diligence	Lear argues many months of delay were not excludable and Commonwealth failed to exercise due diligence; seeks dismissal	Remanded: because county treated emergency delays as court postponements, the trial court must hold a Rule 600(D) hearing to determine whether the Commonwealth exercised due diligence; if not, dismiss convictions and vacate sentence

Key Cases Cited

Commonwealth v. Moore, 446 A.2d 960 (Pa. Super. 1982) (seizure/examination of wallet during investigatory stop was permissible under totality of circumstances)
Commonwealth v. Rogers, 849 A.2d 1185 (Pa. 2004) (totality-of-circumstances test and deference to reasonable inferences drawn by officers)
Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1968) (framework for investigatory stops and reasonable suspicion)
Commonwealth v. Harth, 252 A.3d 600 (Pa. 2021) (Commonwealth must prove due diligence before a court may exclude judicial delay from Rule 600 computation)
Commonwealth v. Carl, 276 A.3d 743 (Pa. Super. 2022) (distinguishing unqualified Rule 600 suspensions from local orders treating delays as court postponements)
In re General Statewide Judicial Emergency, 228 A.3d 1281 (Pa. 2020) (Supreme Court authorized president judges to suspend Rule 600 during COVID emergency)
Commonwealth v. McMahon, 280 A.3d 1069 (Pa. Super. 2022) (standard of review for suppression rulings)