Commonwealth v. Knoble, 42 A.3d 976

Knoble pleaded guilty in Feb. 2005 to endangering the welfare of a child, corruption of minors, and conspiracy to commit statutory assault, receiving 1–2 years’ imprisonment followed by four years’ probation.
He signed an Acceptance for State Supervision agreeing to comply with special probation conditions, including completion of a sex offender outpatient program.
During probation, he was terminated from the program for dishonesty after polygraph-related disclosures and arrested for probation violation.
At a Gagnon II hearing, Knoble admitted dishonesty in treatment; the court revoked probation and sentenced him on the underlying offenses.
The Superior Court reversed, holding polygraph inquiries that probed uncharged conduct violated the Fifth Amendment; this Court granted allocatur to resolve whether a probationer may invoke the Fifth Amendment for such questions and when invocation must occur.
The Court held that therapeutic polygraphs asking about uncharged conduct do not inherently violate the Fifth Amendment, and a probationer may raise the privilege before answering questions or during questioning; failure to invoke waives the right; revocation was not based on the incriminating admissions, and the evidence may be used.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a probationer may invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination from therapeutic polygraph questions.	Knoble argues the polygraph questions elicit incriminating information, violating the Fifth Amendment.	Commonwealth contends no Fifth Amendment violation since statements aren’t used in a criminal prosecution and rights not self-executing.	Therapeutic polygraphs do not inherently violate the Fifth Amendment; privilege is not self-executing and waiver occurs if not invoked.
Whether the Fifth Amendment privilege is self-executing when a probationer faces revocation for exercising that privilege.	Knoble contends invocation would lead to probation revocation, so privilege is self-executing.	Commonwealth argues no automatic revocation for invoking the privilege and conditions permit questioning.	Privilege is not self-executing; failure to invoke does not require exclusion; revocation here was for failure to comply with treatment, not for the incriminating admissions.

Minnesota v. Murphy, 465 U.S. 420 (U.S. 1984) (probationer's statements to officer are admissible absent compelled invocation of privilege)
Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (U.S. 1973) (due process requires Gagnon I/II hearings before revoking probation)
Lefkowitz v. Cunningham, 431 U.S. 801 (U.S. 1977) (exception for penalizing assertion of privilege not present here)
Commonwealth v. Shrawder, 940 A.2d 436 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2007) (therapeutic polygraphs may involve uncharged conduct; Fifth Amendment concerns vary by context)
Commonwealth v. Arroyo, 723 A.2d 162 (Pa. 1999) (Pennsylvania constitutional rights mirror Fifth Amendment)