HomeMy WebLinkAboutCP-21-CR-1584-2004
COMMONWEALTH
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
KENNY JOHNSON
NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 1584 - 2004
IN RE: OPINION PURSUANT TO Pa. RA.P. 1925
Guido, J., March
, 2006
The defendant was charged with numerous crimes as a result of his sexual
misconduct while on duty as a Middlesex Township Police Officer. After hearing several
days of testimony, the jury was asked to consider three counts of rape, 1 two counts of
involuntary deviate sexual intercourse2 three counts of sexual assault,3 three counts of
prostitution,4 four counts of bribery in official and political matters,S two counts of
official oppression,6 two counts of obstructing administration of law or other
governmental function,7 two counts of tampering with public records,8 and one count of
criminal attempt to prostitution.9 He was acquitted of all charges except for two counts
ofbribery.lo He filed a timely appeal in which he challenged, inter alia, the sufficiency
of the evidence. 11
In our 1925 opinion filed in connection with that appeal we noted the following:
Section 4701 of the Crimes Code provides as follows:
1 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 3121 (a) (2).
218 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 3123 (a) (2).
3l8pa. C.S.A. ~ 3124.1.
4 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 5902 (b) (3).
5 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 4701.
6 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 5301.
7 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 5101.
8 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 4911 (a) (2).
9 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 901.
10 18 Pa. C.S.A. ~ 4701.
11 The matter is still on appeal to the Superior Court.
NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 1584 - 2004
A person is guilty of bribery, a felony of the third degree, if he
offers, confers or agrees to confer upon another, or solicits, accepts
or agrees to accept from another.
(1) any pecuniary benefit as consideration for the decision,
opinion, recommendation, vote or other exercise of
discretion as a public servant, party official or voter by the
recipient;
(2) any benefit as consideration for the decision, vote,
recommendation or other exercise of official discretion by
the recipient in a judicial, administrative or legislative
proceeding; or
(3) any benefit as consideration for a violation of a known
legal duty as public servant or party official.
18 Pa. C.S.A. S 47 01 (a) (1) - (3). The information filed by the
Commonwealth charged the defendant under all three subsections.
However, at the request of the Commonwealth, only subsection (1) was
submitted to the jury for consideration. 12
On December 5,2005 defendant filed a "Petition to Correct Docket Entries". He
complained that the official docket reflected that appellant was convicted under Section
4701 (3) of the Crimes Code. He requested that we order the docket to be corrected to
reflect that he was convicted under only 4701 (1). We denied his request and the current
appeal followed.
In its answer and argument before this Court, the Commonwealth objected to a
correction of the docket. It contended that all subsections of the bribery statute come into
play for purposes of a sufficiency of the evidence review. It viewed defendant's request
to be a procedural ploy designed only to limit the Superior Court's scope of review. It
further contended that "The Superior Court of Pennsylvania is perfectly capable of
resolving these issues without this Honorable Court's intervention.,,13
We found the Commonwealth's last contention to be particularly compelling.
Therefore we refused the defendant's request to correct the docket.
12 See Opinion dated August 25, 2005.
13 See Answer of the Commonwealth, paragraph 9.
2
NO. CP-21-CRIMINAL 1584 - 2004
DATE
Jaime Keating, Esquire
For the Commonwealth
Karl Rominger, Esquire
F or the Defendant
:sld
Edward E. Guido, 1.
3