Commonwealth v. Jackson
10 A.3d 341
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2010Background
- A 2008 PFA order prohibited Jackson from contact with Wife and others protected, and granted Wife exclusive possession of the marital residence.
- On January 13, 2009 Jackson entered the marital residence while Wife was present, leading to a petition for indirect criminal contempt and criminal charges for burglary, criminal trespass, firearms violations, assault, and possession of an instrument of crime.
- Jackson pled or admitted to violating the PFA order in an indirect criminal contempt hearing on January 28-29, 2009, and was sentenced to 60 days to six months.
- A preliminary hearing on March 9, 2009 narrowed charges to burglary, trespass, and assault; other charges were withdrawn.
- In January 2010 Jackson moved to dismiss certain charges under double jeopardy; the trial court granted trespass dismissal but denied assault dismissal; Commonwealth appealed and Jackson cross-appealed.
- The Superior Court ultimately held that double jeopardy barred the trespass charge, did not bar burglary, and allowed assault to proceed, remanding for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does double jeopardy bar trespass after contempt? | Commonwealth contends trespass is barred as a lesser-included offense. | Jackson argues separate prosecution does not violate double jeopardy. | Trespass barred by double jeopardy |
| Does double jeopardy bar burglary after contempt? | Commonwealth argues burglary has a distinct element set from contempt. | Jackson contends burglary is a lesser-included/offense under the same facts. | Burglary not barred |
| Does double jeopardy bar assault after contempt? | Commonwealth asserts assault shares no elements with contempt. | Jackson maintains overlap with contempt requires bar of assault. | Assault not barred |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Decker, 664 A.2d 1028 (Pa. Super. 1995) (illustrates same-elements approach when contempt and related offenses overlap)
- Commonwealth v. Beckwith, 674 A.2d 276 (Pa. Super. 1996) (same-elements test; overlap does not alone establish double jeopardy)
- Commonwealth v. Caufman, 662 A.2d 1050 (Pa. 1995) (same-elements analysis guidance)
- United States v. Dixon, 509 U.S. 688 (U.S. Supreme Court 1993) (Blockburger same-elements test for double jeopardy)
- Commonwealth v. Brumbaugh, 932 A.2d 108 (Pa. Super. 2007) (indirect criminal contempt elements require clear order and intent)
- Commonwealth v. Mattis, 686 A.2d 408 (Pa. Super. 1996) (plenary review of double jeopardy determinations)
- Commonwealth v. Moser, 999 A.2d 602 (Pa. Super. 2010) (good-faith certification exception to final-order rule)