210 Pa. Code Rule 1611 – Review of Special Prosecution Orders.

(a) General rule.—Within ten days after the entry of the order sought to be reviewed, a petition for specialized review may be filed in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania seeking review of the following orders:
1. (1) An order relating to the supersession of a district attorney by an Attorney General or by a court, or to the appointment, supervision, administration or operation of a special prosecutor.
2. (2) An order relating to the convening or discharge of an investigating grand jury or otherwise affecting its existence.
3. (3) An order entered in connection with the supervision, administration, or operation of an investigating grand jury or otherwise directly affecting an investigating grand jury or any investigation conducted by it.
4. (4) An order enforcing or refusing to enforce a subpoena issued by or otherwise affecting the existence or operation of any investigating committee of the General Assembly.
5. (5) An order of the type specified in subparagraphs (1) through (4) of this paragraph which contains a statement by the trial court pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 702(b) (interlocutory appeals by permission). Chapter 13 shall not be applicable to such an order.
  A party shall file the certificate of compliance required by Pa.R.A.P. 127 with the petition for specialized review. Seven copies of any filings under this rule shall be filed with the original. Pa.R.A.P. 3309 (applications for extraordinary relief) shall not be applicable to an order reviewable under this rule.
(b) Opinion and record.—The Supreme Court on its own initiative may direct that the trial court comply with Pa.R.A.P. 1925 or that the record be otherwise corrected or supplemented.
(c) Distribution and disposition.—Upon receipt of the last filing that a party is entitled to make under this rule, the filings shall be distributed by the Prothonotary to the Supreme Court for its consideration. The Supreme Court may thereafter dispose of the petition or set it down for argument.
(d) Interlocutory matters.—The interlocutory or final nature of an order shall not be affected by this rule and, unless independent grounds appear for the review of an interlocutory order, the interlocutory nature of the order will be a sufficient reason for denying the petition. The denial of a petition shall be deemed a disposition on the merits unless otherwise ordered or unless the petition expressly seeks permission to appeal from an interlocutory order and asserts no other basis of jurisdiction on appeal.
(e) Remand of record.—Unless otherwise ordered:
1. (1) A certified copy of the judgment of the Supreme Court and the opinion of the court, if one has been filed, shall be transmitted to the trial court forthwith upon entry, notwithstanding the pendency of any application for reargument or other proceeding affecting the judgment. This transmission shall be in lieu of the remand of the record.
2. (2) Such transmission shall operate to vacate any order theretofore entered pursuant to Chapter 17.
  Official Note
  This rule is intended to provide a simple and expeditious method for Supreme Court supervision of special prosecutions and investigations, for example, orders of the supervising judge of an investigating grand jury, findings of contempt (whether civil or criminal) by witnesses called before such a grand jury, etc. Pa.R.A.P. 702(c) and 42 Pa.C.S. § 722(5) vest jurisdiction over such matters in the Supreme Court. However, this rule is not applicable to review of investigating grand jury issues that collaterally arise in a plenary criminal prosecution initiated by complaint, information, or indictment. This rule requires that review be sought within ten days. There is no delay for certification of the record, oral argument is ordinarily not available, and the matter is ready for final disposition by the Supreme Court immediately upon completion of the briefing schedule.
  The term ‘‘investigating grand jury’’ in paragraph (a) includes a ‘‘multicounty investigating grand jury’’ convened under 42 Pa.C.S. § 4544. The ‘‘independent grounds’’ referred to in paragraph (d) include grounds for relief in the nature of mandamus, prohibition, etc. and cases where the order is reviewable under the standards of 42 Pa.C.S. § 702(b).
  Failure to petition for specialized review under this rule from an interlocutory order will ordinarily not constitute a waiver of objections to the order because, except as prescribed by Pa.R.A.P. 311(g)(1)(ii), there is no requirement under these rules that a party seek available interlocutory relief.
  Under Pa.R.A.P. 1702(a), the Supreme Court or a justice thereof will not entertain an application for relief under Pa.R.A.P. 1781 (stay pending action on petitions) in connection with a special prosecution or investigation order until a petition for specialized review has been filed under this rule.