Commonwealth v. Giordano
121 A.3d 998
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2015Background
- On Sept. 17–18, 2013, William Giordano went to the Scranton School District administration building angry about his child’s dress-code-related removal; he was wearing a sword in a scabbard and placed his hand on the hilt, which made staff feel threatened.
- District staff and the superintendent asked Giordano to remove the sword and ultimately escorted him out; police were called and Giordano was later arrested after refusing to cooperate.
- Giordano was charged with two counts of possessing a weapon on school property (18 Pa.C.S. § 912(b)) and two counts of disorderly conduct; he was convicted on the two weapon counts and acquitted of disorderly conduct.
- The trial court sentenced Giordano to restrictive intermediate punishment and probation; post-sentence motions were denied and he appealed, challenging sufficiency, weight of the evidence, and the discretionary aspects of sentence.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether the administration building qualified as an “elementary or secondary publicly-funded educational institution” under § 912 and whether § 912 requires criminal intent (mens rea).
Issues
| Issue | Giordano's Argument | Commonwealth's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 912 applies to the school district administration building | Administration building is not an elementary or secondary school because no regular classes or assigned teachers occurred there | Building is part of the school district and used for student activities (registration, diagnostic & homebound instruction, cooperative education) so it falls within § 912 | The administration building is encompassed by § 912 because instructional activities occur there and the statute protects students wherever they are taught |
| Whether § 912 is a strict liability offense (mens rea requirement) | § 912 should require intent under § 302 because it is not a mere regulatory public-welfare offense | § 912 is a strict liability public-welfare offense or, alternatively, the evidence showed Giordano acted knowingly/intentionally | § 912 is not strict liability; the Commonwealth must prove intentional, knowing, or reckless conduct under § 302; here evidence showed Giordano knew he had the sword and knew weapons were prohibited |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to convict under § 912 | Commonwealth failed to prove § 912’s location element (not a school) and failed to show mens rea | Evidence showed instructional activity in the building and Giordano’s admissions that he knew weapons weren’t permitted and that he wore the sword intentionally | Conviction affirmed: evidence sufficient to prove location and that Giordano acted knowingly |
| Weight of the evidence | Verdict was against the weight because the building is not a school | Trial testimony corroborated that instruction occurs in the building; no contradictory evidence | Trial court did not abuse discretion; weight claim denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Cahill, 95 A.3d 298 (Pa. Super. 2014) (sufficiency-review framework and statutory interpretation principles)
- Commonwealth v. Moran, 104 A.3d 1136 (Pa. 2014) (analysis that statutes with serious penalties generally require mens rea absent clear legislative intent)
- Commonwealth v. Hurst, 889 A.2d 624 (Pa. Super. 2005) (statutes imposing imprisonment likely require mens rea; not strict liability)
- Commonwealth v. Widmer, 744 A.2d 745 (Pa. 2000) (standard and deference for weight-of-the-evidence post-trial motions)