Almusa v. State Board of Medicine

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania considered whether Act 53, which limits automatic professional-license suspensions for felony drug convictions to drug trafficking offenses, applies to a physician's later application for reinstatement. The Court held that automatic suspension under the Medical Practice Act and reinstatement are separate Board actions, and that applying Act 53 to the reinstatement proceeding is not impermissibly retroactive. The Court reversed the Commonwealth Court's decision.

Holdings

1. Under the Medical Practice Act, automatic suspension under Section 40(b) and reinstatement under Section 43(b) are separate and distinct official actions of the State Board of Medicine.
2. Section 3113 of Act 53 applies to Almusa's reinstatement proceeding because the proceeding was an official act and disciplinary matter of a licensing board beginning after December 28, 2020; consequently, the ten-year waiting period applies only if the conviction was for a drug-trafficking offense.
3. The Court did not apply the rule of lenity because the relevant statutory language was unambiguous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Sections 40(b) and 43(b) of the Medical Practice Act impose a single ten-year automatic suspension or require separate Board actions for automatic suspension and reinstatement.
2. Whether applying Section 3113(f) of Act 53 to Almusa's post-enactment reinstatement proceeding constitutes impermissible retroactive application.
3. Whether the rule of lenity supports granting Almusa a reinstatement hearing.

Disposition

reversed