Commonwealth v. Martin
97 A.3d 363
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- Appellee Robert Martin was charged with DUI; bench trial in municipal court on Jan 4, 2013.
- At the start of the hearing Appellee waived arraignment; Commonwealth requested a continuance to obtain a particular witness.
- Municipal court denied the continuance; Commonwealth discovered other witnesses had left and renewed its continuance request, which was again denied.
- Commonwealth moved to withdraw the prosecution over Appellee’s objection; the municipal court instead announced a verdict of not guilty without hearing any evidence.
- Commonwealth appealed to the court of common pleas, which affirmed on double jeopardy grounds; Commonwealth appealed to the Superior Court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Commonwealth) | Defendant's Argument (Martin) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether jeopardy attached before evidence was heard such that a municipal court’s not-guilty verdict precludes reprosecution | Jeopardy had not attached because no evidence was taken; therefore municipal court’s not-guilty verdict was improper and common pleas erred in affirming | The municipal court’s not-guilty verdict barred reprosecution under double jeopardy | Reversed: jeopardy attaches in a bench trial only when the court begins to hear evidence; no evidence was heard, so the not-guilty label cannot bar reprosecution and the municipal court should have dismissed or permitted withdrawal rather than enter a not-guilty verdict |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Vargas, 947 A.2d 777 (Pa. Super. 2008) (jeopardy in bench trials attaches when court begins to hear evidence)
- Commonwealth v. Wallace, 686 A.2d 1337 (Pa. Super. 1996) (not-guilty entered for failure to produce witness is functionally a dismissal and does not bar reprosecution)
- Serfass v. United States, 420 U.S. 377 (U.S. 1975) (bench-trial jeopardy principles)
- Commonwealth v. Jung, 531 A.2d 498 (Pa. Super. 1987) (double jeopardy attached where Commonwealth called its first witness and an offer of proof was made)
- Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 438 A.2d 596 (Pa. 1981) (discussed by lower court regarding unanswered calls for witnesses)
- Commonwealth v. Ortega, 995 A.2d 879 (Pa. Super. 2010) (bench-trial jeopardy attachment rule)
- Commonwealth v. Micklos, 672 A.2d 796 (Pa. Super. 1996) (bench-trial jeopardy principles)