Commonwealth v. Horn
172 A.3d 1133
Pa. Super. Ct.2017Background
- Timothy Horn was charged with DUI (75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3802(d)(2)) after a July 22, 2015 arrest.
- Horn petitioned for and was accepted into the ARD (Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition) program by the trial court on June 2, 2016.
- On September 23, 2016 Horn filed a petition asking to be removed from ARD so he could contest the charges at trial; he also moved to suppress blood-test results under Birchfield but the suppression issue was later treated as moot.
- The trial court held a hearing on November 30, 2016 and denied Horn’s petition to withdraw from ARD; Horn appealed the denial on December 19, 2016.
- The Superior Court sua sponte considered whether the order was appealable and concluded it was interlocutory because ARD acceptance/termination is a non-final proceeding that postpones the prosecution.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred by denying Horn’s petition to remove himself from ARD | Horn: He wishes to leave ARD and proceed to trial to contest the charges | Commonwealth/Trial Court: Denial of withdrawal was an interlocutory matter subject to ARD rules and not immediately appealable | Denied jurisdiction — appeal quashed because order is interlocutory and not appealable as of right |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Getz, 598 A.2d 1309 (Pa. Super. 1991) (acceptance into ARD is interlocutory and not appealable)
- Rae v. Pa. Funeral Dir’s Ass’n, 977 A.2d 1121 (Pa. 2009) (Superior Court’s jurisdiction generally extends only to final orders)
- Commonwealth v. Kurilla, 570 A.2d 1073 (Pa. Super. 1990) (defendant may appeal only from a final judgment of sentence)