Commonwealth v. Taylor
137 A.3d 611
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2016Background
- Robert W. Taylor II was convicted at bench trial of two counts of indirect criminal contempt for violating a Protection from Abuse (PFA) order and related custody orders.
- The PFA order entered May 18, 2012 prohibited contact with J.N.K. except for limited text messaging for custody; a May 22, 2013 custody consent allowed text communication for legitimate issues involving the children.
- June 21, 2013 custody exchange involved Taylor using a child to communicate about housing, leading to an ICC charge based on indirect communication through the child.
- July 13, 2013 Taylor texted J.N.K. about the marital home and paperwork; the trial court found this violated the PFA and the custody order and showed wrongful intent.
- The trial court sentenced Taylor to 90 days in jail and $300 fines on each count, to run concurrently.
- An appellate panel initially reversed for insufficiency of evidence, en banc revived the case, and the matter is now affirmed by the court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Custody order considered before ICC charge? | Taylor | Commonwealth | Affirmed |
| Excessiveness of sentence for ICC conviction? | Taylor | Commonwealth | Affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Woodard, 129 A.3d 480 (Pa.2015) (sufficiency standard for ICC and modern framework)
- Commonwealth v. Jackson, 10 A.3d 341 (Pa.Super.2010) (PFA ICC elements and intent considerations)
- Commonwealth v. Haigh, 874 A.2d 1174 (Pa.Super.2005) (contextual and de minimis communications in ICC cases)
- Commonwealth v. Griffin, 65 A.3d 932 (Pa.Super.2013) (four-part test for discretionary sentencing review)
- Commonwealth v. Kiesel, 854 A.2d 530 (Pa.Super.2004) (Rule 2119(f) requirement in discretionary review; sua sponte application)
- Commonwealth v. Walsh, 36 A.3d 613 (Pa.Super.2012) ( wrongful intent in PFA ICC context)