Commonwealth v. Sarapa
13 A.3d 961
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2011Background
- Sarapa pled guilty to DUI—highest rate and DUI—general impairment after a 2008 Greene County crash; BAC 0.264.
- Greene County policy barred DUI offenders from IPP; trial court sentenced Sarapa 90 days to 23.5 months due to second DUI within ten years.
- Issue on appeal: whether county IPP restrictions can limit eligibility when statutes define eligible offenders.
- Appellate review is de novo as a pure issue of statutory interpretation; not a discretionary-sentencing challenge.
- Court held Greene County IPP policy unlawfully restricts IPP eligibility; policy conflicts with the Act and upends trial court sentencing authority; remand for reconsideration with guidance.
- Court notes that its decision does not compel IPP sentencing on remand; Court emphasizes individualized consideration of IPP criteria.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May a county IPP plan restrict DUI offenders from IPP despite statutory eligibility? | Sarapa: county cannot redefine eligibility; DUI offenders are eligible under the Act. | Sarapa argues Greene County may bar DUI offenders via policy under its IPP plan. | No; county cannot preclude eligibility; law requires Court to determine IPP eligibility per statute. |
| Did the trial court err by applying the county policy to deny IPP eligibility and sentence Sarapa accordingly? | Sarapa asserts policy wrongfully deprived IPP eligibility contrary to Act. | Greene County policy prevented IPP; court lacked discretion to grant IPP. | Yes; error of law to apply county policy; remand for proper IPP consideration. |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Williams, 941 A.2d 14 (Pa. Super. 2008) (county IPP discretion; eligibility defined by Act not subject to arbitrary denial)
- Commonwealth v. Arest, 734 A.2d 910 (Pa. Super. 1999) (county plan may restrict type of IPP but not bar eligibility altogether)
- Commonwealth v. Syno, 791 A.2d 363 (Pa. Super. 2002) (probation department cannot deny IPP eligibility; legislature sets eligibility)
- Commonwealth v. Walls, 592 Pa. 557, 926 A.2d 957 (Pa. 2007) (sentencing should be individualized; local plans cannot defeat statutory goals)