Summary
The court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss charges for failing to file sales tax returns and remit sales taxes. It held that 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103 did not require transfer of the first criminal complaint filed in the wrong county and that the Rule 1100 180-day period ran from the second complaint because the first complaint was properly dismissed and the prosecution had not attempted to circumvent the rule.
Holdings
- Section 5103 does not apply to matters within the original criminal jurisdiction of a court; therefore, the Union County court properly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction rather than transferring it to Dauphin County.
- The Rule 1100 period begins with the filing of the second complaint when the first complaint was properly dismissed and the record does not show an attempt by the prosecution to circumvent Rule 1100.
Questions Presented
- Whether 42 Pa.C.S. § 5103 required the Union County court to transfer, rather than dismiss, the criminal complaint filed there without original jurisdiction.
- Whether the Rule 1100 180-day period began with the filing of the first complaint or with the filing of the second complaint in Dauphin County.
- Whether the Commonwealth attempted to circumvent Rule 1100 by dismissing and refiling the charges.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Commonwealth v. Boyle, 347 Pa. Super. 602, 500 A.2d 1221 (1985)(followed)
- Commonwealth v. Wadzinski, 485 Pa. 247, 401 A.2d 1129 (1978)(distinguished)
- Commonwealth v. McClain, 325 Pa. Super. 29, 472 A.2d 630 (1984)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…