Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. David BELL, Appellant

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

Order of the Superior Court, 245 Pa. Super. 164, 369 A.2d 345, affirmed.

POMEROY and MANDERINO, JJ., did not participate in the consideration of this case.

ROBERTS, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

ROBERTS, Justice, dissenting.

The majority today holds that when a juvenile case is transferred to adult court, the 180 day period within which trial must be brought under Rule 1100 begins to run at the time of the transfer. I dissent. Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 472 Pa. 553, 372 A.2d 826 (1977), is controlling. There we relied on the comment to Rule 1100 which indicates that the 180 day period is to commence when criminal proceedings are initiated. Here I would hold that proceedings were initiated by the filing of the delinquency petition in juvenile court.

Because the 180 day period began to run when the delinquency petition was filed, the Commonwealth failed to bring appellant to trial within the time mandated by Rule 1100. I would therefore reverse the order of the Superior Court and reinstate the trial court order, dismissing the charges with prejudice.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

COM. v. BELL
(Oct 5, 1978)