Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout97-1443-1448 CriminalCOMMONWEALTH VS. CORY CORMANY IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 97-1443 CRIMINAL 97-1444 CRIMINAL 97-1445 CRIMINAL 97-1446 CRIMINAL 97-1447 CRIMINAL 97-1448 CRIMINAL IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO RULE 1925 The defendant, Cory Cormany, was arrested for public drunkenness on December 27, 1997. As a result of this arrest and incidents which occurred later, the defendant was charged with three counts of disorderly conduct, two counts of criminal mischief, and one count of public drunkenness. He was found guilty by a district justice and subsequently appealed his conviction pursuant to Rule 86(a) and (f) of the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, but failed to appear for his trial as required by Rule 1117(a) and (c). Mr. Cormany's appeal was dismissed and a bench warrant was issued for his arrest. Rule 86(a) specifies the manner of taking a summary appeal. (a) When an appeal is authorized by law in a summary proceeding, including a prosecution for violation of a municipal ordinance which provides for imprisonment upon conviction or upon failure to pay a fine, an appeal shall be perfected by filing a notice of appeal within thirty (30) days after the conviction or other f'mal order from which the appeal is taken and by appearing in the court of common pleas for the trial de novo. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the clerk or courts. Pa.R. Crim. P., Rule 86(a), 42 Pa.C.S.A. Rule 86(0 states that the defendant is entitled to a trial de novo. (f) When a defendant appeals after conviction by an issuing authority in any summary proceeding, upon the filing of the transcript and other papers by the issuing authority, the case shall be heard de novo by the appropriate division of the court of common pleas as the president judge shall direct. Pa.R. Crim. P., Rule 86(0, 42 Pa.C.S.A If a defendant fails to appear for trial in a criminal case generally, Rule 1117(a) provides that "the defendant's absence without cause shall not preclude proceeding with the trial including the return of the verdict." Rule 1117 was amended in 1994 to include subsection (c) which states that: (c) In a summary case appealed for a trial de novo, if the defendam fails to appear as required by Rule 86, the trial judge may dismiss the appeal and enter judgmem in the court of common pleas on the judgmem of the issuing authority. Pa.R. Crim. P., Rule 1117(c), 42 Pa.C.S.A. Additionally, the commem to Rule 1117 states that subsection (c) was added "to make it clear that the trial judge may dismiss a summary case appeal when the judge determines that the defendam is absent without cause from the trial de novo." Rule 86(a) requires notice of the appeal to be fried with the clerk of courts. Rule 1117(c) requires the defendant to appear for the trial de novo. "[T]he penalty for failing to satisfy both elemems of perfecting a summary appeal, notice and an appearance, exposes a defendant to the peril of dismissal of his appeal." Commonwealth v, L0we, 698 A.2d 607, 609 (Pa. Super. 1997). Mr. Cormany was absem from his trial "without cause." The record shows that he was sent two notices of his trial date, and that they were sent to the correct address. Also, the attorney for Mr. Cormany stated that the defendant knew that his appeal had been filed. Police officers were also in the courtroom ready to testify, but Mr. Cormany was not there. Consequently, in keeping with Rule 1117(a) and (c), his appeal was dismissed, the judgment of the issuing authority was entered, and a warrant was issued for his arrest. March ?~, 1998 Jaime Keating, Esquire Chief Deputy District Attorney Cory Cormany, Pro Se 1883 Douglas Drive Carlisle, PA 17013 Hess, J.