1. (A) When a defendant has been arrested in a court case, with a warrant, outside the judicial district where the warrant of arrest was issued, the defendant may be taken for a preliminary arraignment or the posting of bail to an advanced communication technology site that, in the judgment of the arresting officer, is most convenient to the place of arrest without regard to the boundary of any magisterial district or judicial district; and
2. (1) the defendant must be taken to the advanced communication technology site without unnecessary delay.
3. (2) The preliminary arraignment may be conducted pursuant to Rule 540 by the proper issuing authority in the magisterial district or judicial district in which the warrant was issued; or
4. (3) the defendant may post bail as permitted by law with the proper issuing authority in the judicial district in which the defendant was arrested.
5. (B) If a preliminary arraignment is conducted pursuant to paragraph (A)(2), and the defendant does not post bail, the issuing authority who conducted the preliminary arraignment shall commit the defendant to the jail in the judicial district in which the defendant was arrested or the judicial district in which the warrant was issued.
6. (1) The issuing authority may transmit to the jail any required documents by using advanced communication technology.
7. (2) When a monetary condition of bail is set by the issuing authority who conducted the preliminary arraignment, the payment of the monetary condition shall be made to either the issuing authority who imposed the monetary condition or the proper issuing authority in the judicial district in which the defendant was arrested.

8. (C) Pursuant to paragraph (A)(3), when the defendant appears via advanced communication technology before the proper issuing authority in the judicial district in which the defendant was arrested, the procedures set forth in Rule 517 shall be followed.

   Comment

   This rule sets forth the procedures for using advanced communication technology when a defendant is arrested with a warrant outside the judicial district in which it was issued: when advanced communication technology is available, the defendant could be preliminarily arraigned by the issuing authority who issued the warrant, or the ‘‘on-duty’’ issuing authority in that judicial district, or ‘‘appear’’ via advanced communication technology before the proper issuing authority for the purpose of posting bail.

   See Rule 130 concerning venue.

   See Rule 132 concerning the continuous availability and temporary assignment of issuing authorities.

   When advanced communication technology is available only in the judicial district of arrest, the case would proceed under paragraph (A)(3), unless the defendant consents to dispense with the procedures in paragraph (A)(3), and the defendant is afforded a preliminary arraignment without unnecessary delay in the judicial district in which the warrant was issued.

   See Rule 540 and Comment for the procedures governing the use in preliminary arraignments of two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication, which is a form of advanced communication technology.

   This rule permits a defendant to be transported to an advanced communication technology site that is located outside the judicial district of arrest. The arresting officer should determine which site is the most convenient to the place of arrest without regard to the boundary of any magisterial district or judicial district.

   For purposes of this rule, if a defendant is arrested pursuant to an arrest warrant issued following indictment pursuant to Rule 556.11(E), the issuing authority in the county of issuance is the supervising judge of the grand jury in that county or the president judge’s designee. See Rule 556.13.

   Official Note

   New Rule 518 adopted May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002; Comment revised November 27, 2018, effective March 1, 2019.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the May 10, 2002 adoption of new Rule 518 published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. 2591 (May 25, 2002).

   Final Report explaining the November 27, 2018 revisions to the Comment regarding post-indictment arrest warrants published with the Court’s Order at 48 Pa.B. 7632 (December 15, 2018).

Source

The provisions of this Rule 518 adopted May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002, 32 Pa.B. 2582; amended November 27, 2018, effective March 1, 2019, 48 Pa.B. 7626. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (383598) to (383600).

(b) Arrests Without Warrant