Commonwealth v. Johnson
11 A.3d 509
Pa. Super. Ct.2010Background
- Commonwealth charged Johnson in Aug. 2008 with rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, and sexual assault based on May 2008 events at SCI Dallas.
- Preliminary hearing was scheduled; Commonwealth granted two continuances; hearing held Nov. 17, 2008, Johnson waived preliminary hearing, charges bound over for trial.
- On Dec. 18, 2008, after reviewing the affidavit, the Commonwealth filed a notice of disapproval and dismissed all three charges.
- On Jan. 20, 2009, the Commonwealth refiled a new complaint with the same facts, this time accusing aggravated indecent assault.
- Preliminary hearing occurred on June 2, 2009; Johnson later moved under Rule 600 alleging speedy-trial violation; trial court dismissed the information on Nov. 12, 2009.
- Appellate court reversed, holding the 365-day period runs from the second filing date (Jan. 20, 2009) and that the Commonwealth exercised due diligence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does Rule 600(a)(2) clock start? | Johnson argues start is initial dismissal date. | Commonwealth argues start is refiled complaint date due to due diligence. | Start date is January 20, 2009. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Meadius, 582 Pa. 174 (2005) (evades evasion by not refiling to extend time; supports due-diligence analysis)
- Commonwealth v. Sires, 424 A.2d 1386 (1981) (two-prong approach and evasion prohibition for Rule 600 timing)
- Commonwealth v. Surovcik, 933 A.2d 651 (Pa. Super.2007) (explains Rule 600 purposes and limits on evading speedy-trial rights)
- Commonwealth v. Martz, 926 A.2d 514 (Pa. Super.2007) (confirms interpretation of Rule 600 alongside Meadius)