Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. William and Nancy Clementi

Summary

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania held that the trial court erred in concluding it lacked jurisdiction to consider the Clementis’ motion for reconsideration nunc pro tunc. The court explained that a motion for reconsideration in a summary appeal may be governed by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5505, and that a trial court may consider nunc pro tunc relief after the 30-day period upon a showing of extraordinary cause. The court vacated the trial court’s orders and remanded for a determination regarding the original motion for reconsideration.

Holdings

1. A motion for reconsideration may be filed in a summary appeal following a trial de novo; although Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 720(D) bars post-sentence motions in that circumstance, the official comment preserves a petition for reconsideration governed by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5505.
2. Expiration of the 30-day period under 42 Pa.C.S. § 5505 does not preclude a trial court from addressing a motion for reconsideration nunc pro tunc when the moving party alleges extraordinary cause justifying intervention.
3. The trial court erred by denying the Motion for Reconsideration Nunc Pro Tunc solely on the belief that it lacked jurisdiction after 30 days; it was required to determine factually whether the alleged scheduling error and other asserted breakdowns constituted extraordinary cause.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant in a summary case following a trial de novo may file a motion for reconsideration governed by 42 Pa.C.S. § 5505 notwithstanding Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 720(D).
2. Whether the trial court could consider a motion for reconsideration nunc pro tunc filed after the 30-day period based on alleged extraordinary cause or an administrative breakdown.
3. Whether the trial court erred by denying the nunc pro tunc motion without making factual findings regarding the alleged procedural breakdowns.

Disposition

vacated