HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-0781-2008
COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
V. :
:
KENNETH JAMES CLARK : CP-21-CR-0781-2008
IN RE: PETITION FOR RELEASE ON NOMINAL BAIL
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
Bayley, J., October 7, 2008:--
1
Defendant, Kenneth James Clark, is charged with rape of a child, involuntary
23
deviate sexual intercourse, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child,
45
statutory sexual assault, two counts of aggravated indecent assault, two counts of
67
indecent assault, and corruption of minors. On August 24, 2008, pursuant to
Pa.R.Crim.P 600, he filed a Petition for Release on Nominal Bail. He maintains that
more than 180 days have passed since the criminal complaint was filed, and he has
been continuously confined awaiting trial on these charges since the date of his arrest.
__________
1
18 Pa.C.S. § 3121(c).
2
18 Pa.C.S. § 3123(a)(7).
3
18 Pa.C.S. § 3123(b).
4
18 Pa.C.S. § 3122.1.
5
18 Pa.C.S. §§ 3125(a)(7) and 3125(a)(8).
6
18 Pa.C.S. §§ 3126(a)(7) and 3126(a)(8).
7
18 Pa.C.S. § 6301(a)(1).
CP-21-CR-0781-2008
The following dates are relevant:
March 3, 2008 Criminal complaint filed and defendant arrested and
committed to Cumberland County Prison in lieu of
$500,000 bail
March 4, 2008 Defense counsel requests continuance of preliminary
hearing set for March 13, 2008. The preliminary
hearing is reset for March 20, 2008
March 20, 2008 Preliminary hearing
May 27, 2008 Formal Arraignment
Defendant ordered toappear for trial on September
8, 2008, at 9:00 a.m.
August 20, 2008 Pre-trial Conference
Order of Court –parties indicated case is ready for
trial, Defendant is directed to appear for trial
September 8, 2008, at 9:00 a.m.
August 29, 2008 Defense Petition for Release on Nominal Bail
September 2, 2008 Court order –
Hearing on the Petition to Release on Nominal Bail
set for September 30, 2008
September 8, 2008 Defense Motion for Continuance of Trial
September 9, 2008 Court Order –
Motion for Continuance granted
Trial continued to November 2008 Term of Court
September 30, 2008 Hearing on Petition for Release on Nominal Bail
-2-
CP-21-CR-0781-2008
Pa.R.Crim.P. 600 provides in pertinent part:
(A)(2) Trial in a court case in which a written complaint is filed against the
defendant, when the defendant is incarcerated on that case, shall
commence no later than 180 days from the date on which the complaint is
filed.
(C) In determining the period for commencement of trial, there shall be
excluded therefrom:
(3) such period of delay at any stage of the proceedings as results
from:
(a) the unavailability of the defendant or the defendant’s
attorney;
(b) any continuance granted at the request of the defendant
or the defendant’s attorney.
(E) No defendant shall be held in pre-trial incarceration on a given case
for a period exceeding 180 days excluding time described in paragraph
(C) above. Any defendant held in excess of 180 days is entitled upon
petition to immediate release on nominal bail.
One hundred eighty days from the date of defendant’s arrest on March 3, 2008,
was August 29, 2008. Seven days are excluded for the defense request for a
continuance of the preliminary hearing from March 13 to March 20. Thus, the new 180
day date became September 5, 2008. On September 2, 2008, defendant, alleging that
more than 180 days had passed since the complaint was filed, sought release on
nominal bail.
The Commonwealth maintains that the 180 day clock stopped on August 29,
2008, when Defendant filed the Petition for Release on Nominal Bail. The period of
time from a defense motion to dismiss until it is addressed is excludable time under the
180 day rule because it is considered delay due to the unavailability of defendant.
Commonwealth v. Williams, Commonwealth v.
726 A.2d 389 (Pa. Super. 1999);
-3-
CP-21-CR-0781-2008
Cook,8
676 A.2d 639 (Pa. 1996).
sub judice
In the case , defendant did not file a motion to dismiss. Rather, he
filed a motion for release on nominal bail. That motion did not affect his availability for
trial which is the same whether he is or is not incarcerated. Accordingly, the 180 day
clock did not stop on August 29, 2008. It did stop pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P.
600(C)(3)(b), on September 8, 2008, when defendant filed the motion for a continuance
th
which was granted on September 9, 2008. However, by that time the 180 day had
already passed on September 5, 2008. Defendant is therefore entitled to release on
nominal bail because he is incarcerated and his case was not commenced by
September 5, 2008.
Pa.R.Crim.P. 524(C)(4), states:
Release on Nominal Bail: Release conditioned upon the defendant’s
depositing a nominal amount of cash which the bail authority determines
is sufficient security for the defendant’s release, such as $1.00, and the
agreement of a designated person, organization, or bail agency to act as
surety for the defendant.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of October, 2008, the petition of defendant for
IS GRANTED.
release on nominal bail, Bail is reset at $1.00 with a condition that
defendant have no direct or indirect contact with the alleged victim (B.S., a child age
13, or any member of her family), and subject to the approval of this court of a
designated person, or organization, or bail agency to act as surety for the defendant.
__________
8
These two cases were decided under the Pa.R.Crim.P. 1100 which is now Rule 600.
-4-
CP-21-CR-0781-2008
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Jaime Keating, Esquire
For the Commonwealth
H. Anthony Adams, Esquire
For Defendant
:sal
-5-
COMMONWEALTH : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
:
V. :
:
KENNETH JAMES CLARK : CP-21-CR-0781-2008
IN RE: PETITION FOR RELEASE ON NOMINAL BAIL
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this day of October, 2008, the petition of defendant for
IS GRANTED.
release on nominal bail, Bail is reset at $1.00 with a condition that
defendant have no direct or indirect contact with the alleged victim (B.S., a child age
13, or any member of her family), and subject to the approval of this court of a
designated person, or organization, or bail agency to act as surety for the defendant.
By the Court,
Edgar B. Bayley, J.
Jaime Keating, Esquire
For the Commonwealth
H. Anthony Adams, Esquire
For Defendant
:sal