Commonwealth v. Estman

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303, which permits prosecution under both general and specific criminal statutes, could not be applied retroactively to conduct occurring before the statute's effective date. The Court affirmed dismissal of the general felony theft charges against Barbara Jean Estman, concluding that the statute substantively affected defendants' rights. Justice Eakin, joined by Justice Castille, concurred separately and argued that Commonwealth v. Lussi had been wrongly decided.

Holdings

1. Section 9303 may not be applied retroactively to conduct occurring before its effective date because the statute is substantive and the General Assembly did not clearly and manifestly indicate that it should operate retroactively.

Questions Presented

1. Whether 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303, which permits prosecution under multiple general and specific criminal statutes arising from the same conduct, may be applied retroactively to conduct occurring before the statute's effective date.
2. Whether § 9303 is substantive or purely procedural for purposes of Pennsylvania's presumption against retroactive legislation.

Disposition

affirmed