CHAPTER 1. SCOPE OF RULES, CONSTRUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, LOCAL RULES

Rule 100. Scope Rules.

 (A)  These rules shall govern criminal proceedings in all courts including courts not of record. Unless otherwise specifically provided, these rules shall not apply to juvenile or domestic relations proceedings.

 (B)  Each of the courts exercising criminal jurisdiction may adopt local rules of procedure in accordance with Rule 105.

   Under the 1974 amendment, the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, formerly inapplicable to summary cases in Philadelphia, now apply to such cases as specified in Chapter 10.

   These rules apply to proceedings involving juveniles only to the extent that the Juvenile Act does not vest jurisdiction in the Juvenile Court, and as provided in the Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure. See, e.g., Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § §  6302—6303, 6355; Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. §  6303, and Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure 105 (Search Warrants), 395 (Procedure to Initiate Criminal Information), and 396 (Bail).

   Official Note

   Prior rule suspended effective May 1, 1970. Present Rule 1 adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; amended April 26, 1972, effective immediately; amended June 28, 1974, effective July 1, 1974; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; Comment revised July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; renumbered Rule 100 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised April 1, 2005, effective October 1, 2005.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the April 1, 2005 Comment revision concerning Rules of Juvenile Court Procedure published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 2213 (April 16, 2005).

 (A)  These rules are intended to provide for the just determination of every criminal proceeding.

 (B)  These rules shall be construed to secure simplicity in procedure, fairness in administration, and the elimination of unjustifiable expense and delay.

 (C)  To the extent practicable, these rules shall be construed in consonance with the rules of statutory construction.

   These rules were adopted under the Act of July 11, 1957, P. L. 819, 17 P. S. 2084 (Supp.), which was repealed by JARA, 42 P. S. §  20002(a), and replaced by 42 Pa.C.S. §  1722(a)(1).

   Official Note

   Rule 2 adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; renumbered Rule 101 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 All criminal procedural rules adopted by the Supreme Court under the authority of Article V 10(c) of the Constitution of Pennsylvania, adopted April 23, 1968, shall be known as the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure and shall be cited as ‘‘Pa.R.Crim.P. .’’

   Official Note

   Rule 4 adopted March 20, 1972, effective immediately; amended September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; renumbered Rule 102 March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

PART A. Business of the Courts

Rule 103. Definitions.

 The following words and phrases, when used in any Rule of Criminal Procedure, shall have the following meanings:

   ADVANCED COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY is any communication equipment that is used as a link between parties in physically separate locations, and includes, but is not limited to: systems providing for two-way simultaneous communication of image and sound; closed-circuit television; telephone and facsimile equipment; and electronic mail.

   ADVANCED COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY SITE is any approved location within Pennsylvania designated by the president judge, or the president judge’s designee, with advanced communication technology equipment that is available for parties in a criminal matter to communicate with others in physically separate locations as provided in these rules.

   AFFIANT is any responsible person capable of taking an oath who signs, swears to, affirms, or, when permitted by these rules, verifies a complaint and appreciates the nature and quality of that person’s act.

   ARRAIGNMENT is the pretrial proceeding in the court of common pleas conducted pursuant to Rule 571.

   BAIL is the security or other guarantee required and given for the release of a person, conditioned upon a written undertaking, in the form of a bail bond, that the person will appear when required and comply with all conditions set forth in the bail bond.

   BAIL AUTHORITY is the district justice magisterial district judge, magistrate, Philadelphia bail commissioner, or the judge with jurisdiction over the case who is authorized by law to set, modify, revoke, or deny bail.

   CAPITAL CASE or CRIME is one in or for which the death penalty may be imposed.

   CARRIER SERVICE includes, but is not limited to, delivery by companies such as Federal Express or United Parcel Service, or a local courier service, and courthouse interoffice mail. The courthouse interoffice mail is a method of delivery used in some judicial districts for transmittal of documents between offices in the courthouse, and between the courthouse and other county facilities, including the county jail facility.

   CLERK OF COURTS is that official, without regard to that person’s title, in each judicial district who, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § §  2756 and 2757, has the responsibility and function to maintain the official criminal case file and list of docket entries, and to perform such other duties as required by rule or law.

   COLLATERAL is cash or a cash equivalent deposited in summary cases.

   COPY is an exact duplicate of an original document, including any required signatures, produced through mechanical or electronic means, and includes, but is not limited to: carbon copies; copies reproduced by using a photocopy machine, by transmission using facsimile equipment, or by scanning into and printing out of a computer.

   COURT is a court of record.

   COURT ADMINISTRATOR is that official in each judicial district who has the responsibility for case management and such other responsibilities as provided by the court.

   COURT CASE is a case in which one or more of the offenses charged is a misdemeanor, felony, or murder of the first, second, or third degree.

   CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS include all actions for the enforcement of the Penal Laws.

   INDICTMENT is a bill of indictment which has been approved by a grand jury and properly returned to court, or which has been endorsed with a waiver as provided in former Rule 215.

   INFORMATION is a formal written accusation of an offense made by the attorney for the Commonwealth, upon which a defendant may be tried, which replaces the indictment in all counties since the use of the indicting grand jury has been abolished.

   ISSUING AUTHORITY is any public official having the power and authority of a magistrate, a Philadelphia bail commissioner, or a magisterial district judge.

   LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is any person who is by law given the power to enforce the law when acting within the scope of that person’s employment.

   MOTION includes any challenge, petition, application, or other form of request for an order or relief.

   ORDINANCE is a legislative enactment of a political subdivision.

   PENAL LAWS include all statutes and embodiments of the common law which establish, create, or define crimes or offenses, including any ordinances which may provide for imprisonment upon conviction or upon failure to pay a fine or penalty.

   POLICE OFFICER is any person who is by law given the power to arrest when acting within the scope of the person’s employment.

   POLITICAL SUBDIVISION shall mean county, city, township, borough, or incorporated town or village having legislative authority.

   PRELIMINARY ARRAIGNMENT is the proceeding following an arrest conducted before an issuing authority pursuant to Rule 540 or Rule 1003(D).

   SEALED VERDICT is a verdict unanimously agreed upon by the jury, completed, dated, and signed by the foreman of the jury, and closed to open view.

   SECURITY shall include cash, certified check, money order, personal check, or guaranteed arrest bond or bail bond certificate.

   SIGNATURE, when used in reference to documents generated by the minor judiciary or court of common pleas, includes a handwritten signature, a copy of a handwritten signature, a computer generated signature, or a signature created, transmitted, received, or stored by electronic means, by the signer or by someone with the signer’s authorization, unless otherwise provided in these rules.

   SUMMARY CASE is a case in which the only offense or offenses charged are summary offenses.

   VOIR DIRE is the examination and interrogation of prospective jurors.

   The definitions of arraignment and preliminary arraignment were added in 2004 to clarify the distinction between the two proceedings. Although both are administrative proceedings at which the defendant is advised of the charges and the right to counsel, the preliminary arraignment occurs shortly after an arrest before a member of the minor judiciary, while an arraignment occurs in the court of common pleas after a case is held for court and an information is filed.

   The definition of information was added to the rules as part of the implementation of the 1973 amendment to PA. CONST. art. I, §  10, permitting the substitution of informations for indictments. The term ‘‘information’’ as used here should not be confused with prior use of the term in Pennsylvania practice as an instrument which served the function now fulfilled by the complaint.

   The definition of bill of indictment was deleted in 1993 as no longer necessary because all courts of common pleas have abolished the indicting grand jury and now provide for the initiation of criminal proceedings by information. See PA. CONST. art. I, §  10 and 42 Pa.C.S. §  8931. Some pending cases, however, may have been instituted prior to the abolition of the indicting grand jury. For this reason, the definition of indictment has been retained in this rule.

   The definitions of bail authority and issuing authority were amended in 2005 to reflect the provisions of Act 207 of 2004 that changed the phrase ‘‘district justice’’ to ‘‘magisterial district judge,’’ effective January 29, 2005. See also the Court’s January 6, 2005 Order providing that any reference to ‘‘district justice’’ in a court rule shall be deemed a reference to a ‘‘magisterial district judge.’’

   Neither the definition of law enforcement officer nor the definition of police officer gives the power of arrest to any person who is not otherwise given that power by law.

   The definition of signature was added in 2004 to make it clear when a rule requires a document generated by the minor judiciary or court of common pleas to include a signature or to be signed, that the signature may be in any of the forms provided in the definition. In addition, documents that institute proceedings or require the inclusion of an oath ordinarily are not documents generated by the minor courts or courts of common pleas and therefore any signature required on the document would not be included in this definition of signature; however, in the event such a document is generated by the minor courts or the courts of common pleas, the form of ‘‘signature’’ on this document is limited to handwritten, and the other forms of signature provided in the definition are not permitted.

   Included in Chapter 5 Part C of the rules are additional definitions of words and phrases that apply specifically to bail in criminal cases. See, e.g., Rule 524, which defines the types of release on bail.

   Official Note

   Previous Rules 3 and 212 adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965, suspended January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; present Rule 3 adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; amended June 8, 1973, effective July 1, 1973; amended February 15, 1974, effective immediately; amended June 30, 1977, effective September 1, 1977; amended January 4, 1979, effective January 9, 1979; amended July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; January 1, 1986 effective date extended to July 1, 1986; amended August 12, 1993, effective September 1, 1993; amended February 27, 1995, effective July 1, 1995; amended September 13, 1995, effective January 1, 1996. The January 1, 1996 effective date extended to April 1, 1996; the April 1, 1996 effective date extended to July 1, 1996; renumbered Rule 103 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002; amended March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended April 30, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended August 24, 2004, effective August 1, 2005; amended February 4, 2005, effective immediately.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Report explaining the August 12, 1993 amendments published at 22 Pa.B. 3826 (July 25, 1992).

   Final Report explaining the February 27, 1995 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 25 Pa.B. 935 (March 18, 1995).

   Final Report explaining the September 13, 1995 amendments published with Court’s Order at 25 Pa.B. 4116 (September 30, 1995).

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the May 10, 2002 amendments concerning advanced communication technology published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. 2591 (May 25, 2002).

   Final Report explaining the March 3, 2004 amendments defining carrier service, clerk of courts, court administrator, and motion published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the April 30, 2004 amendments defining ‘‘signature’’ published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 2542 (May 15, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the August 24, 2004 amendments adding definitions of arraignment and preliminary arraignment published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 5025 (September 11, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the February 4, 2005 amendments modifying the definitions of bail authority and issuing authority published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 1333 (February 19, 2005).

 The Court Administrator of Pennsylvania, in consultation with the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee, shall design and publish forms necessary to implement these Rules.

   Official Note

   Formerly Rule 144, adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; amended and renumbered Rule 5 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; renumbered Rule 104 March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 (A)  For the purpose of this rule, the term ‘‘local rule’’ shall include every rule, administrative order, regulation, directive, policy, custom, usage, form or order of general application, however labeled or promulgated, which is adopted or enforced by a court of common pleas, by the Philadelphia Municipal Court, or by the Philadelphia Traffic Court to govern criminal practice and procedure.

 (B)  Local rules shall not be inconsistent with any general rule of the Supreme Court or any Act of Assembly.

   (1)  The Criminal Procedural Rules Committee may at any time recommend that the Supreme Court suspend, vacate, or require amendment of a local rule.

   (2)  The Criminal Procedural Rules Committee may suspend that local rule pending action by the Court on that recommendation.

 (C)  Local rules shall be given numbers that are keyed to the number of the general rules to which the local rules correspond.

 (D)  All proposed local criminal rules and proposed amendments to local criminal rules shall be submitted in writing to the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee for the Committee to review. The adopting court shall not proceed with the proposed local rule or amendments until the adopting court receives written notification from the Committee that the proposed local rule or amendments are not inconsistent with any general rule of the Supreme Court.

 (E)  All local rules shall be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin to be effective and enforceable.

   (1)  The adopting court shall not publish the local rule in the Pennsylvania Bulletin until it has received the statement from the Committee that the proposed local rule is not inconsistent with any general rule of the Supreme Court.

   (2)  The adopting court shall distribute two certified copies of the local rule and a computer diskette that complies with the requirements of 1 Pa. Code §  13.11(b) to the Legislative Reference Bureau for publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

   (3)  The effective date of the local rule shall not be less than 30 days after the date of publication of the rule in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.

 (F)  Contemporaneously with publishing the local rule in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, the adopting court shall file seven certified copies of the local rule with the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts.

 (G)  The local rules shall be kept continuously available for public inspection and copying in the office of the prothonotary or clerk of courts. Upon request and payment of reasonable costs of reproduction and mailing, the prothonotary or clerk shall furnish to any person a copy of any local rule.

 (H)  A local rule promulgated before the effective date of this rule shall be filed on or before that effective date with the prothonotary or clerk of courts and shall be kept by the prothonotary or clerk for inspection, copying, and furnishing as provided in paragraph (G).

 (I)  No pleading or other legal paper shall be refused for filing by the clerk of courts based on a requirement of a local rule. No case shall be dismissed nor request for relief granted or denied because of failure to comply with a local rule. In any case of noncompliance with a local rule, the court shall alert the party to the specific provision at issue and provide a reasonable time for the party to comply with the local rule.

   The policy of the Supreme Court as declared in the Order promulgating this rule is ‘‘to implement the unified judicial system under the Constitution of 1968, to facilitate the statewide practice of law under this Court’s general rules, and to promote the further policy that a general rule of criminal procedure normally preempts the subject covered.’’ In accordance with the Court’s policy, it is intended that local rules should not repeat general rules or statutory provisions verbatim or substantially verbatim nor should local rules make it difficult for attorneys to practice law in several counties.

   The caption or other words used as a label or designation shall not determine whether something is or establishes a local rule; if the definition in paragraph (A) of this rule is satisfied the matter is a local rule regardless of what it may be called. The provisions of this rule are also intended to apply to any amendments to a ‘‘local rule.’’ Nothing in this rule is intended to apply to case-specific orders.

   To simplify the use of local rules, local criminal rules are required to be given numbers that are keyed to the number of the general criminal rules to which the local rules correspond. This requirement is not intended to apply to local rules that govern the general business of the court and which do not correspond to a general criminal rule.

   Paragraph (D), added in 2008, requires that, before publishing the local rule or proceeding with any of the other requirements in Rule 105(E) and (F), the adopting court must submit all proposed local criminal rules or rule amendments to the Criminal Procedural Rules Committee for review.

   The 2000 and 2008 amendments emphasize that the adopting authority must comply with all the provisions of this rule before any local rule, or any amendments to local rules, will be effective and enforceable.

   Paragraph (E) requires the local rule to be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin to be effective. Pursuant to 1 Pa. Code §  13.11(b), any documents that are submitted for publication must be accompanied by a diskette formatted in MS-DOS, ASCII, Microsoft Word, or WordPerfect. The diskette must be labeled with the court’s name and address and the local rule’s computer file name.

   Paragraph (G) requires that a separate consolidated set of local rules be maintained in the prothonotary’s or clerk’s office.

   The Administrative Office of the Pennsylvania Courts maintains a webpage containing the texts of local rules. That webpage is located at: http://www.courts.state.pa.us/judicial-council/local-rules/index.htm

   Although under paragraph (E)(3) a local rule shall not be effective until at least 30 days after the date of publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, when a situation arises that requires immediate action, the local court may act by specific orders governing particular cases in the interim before an applicable local rule becomes effective.

   The purpose of paragraph (I) is to (1) require that all documents presented for filing are accepted by the clerk of courts, also see Rule 576(A)(3), and (2) prevent the dismissal of cases, or the grant or denial of requested relief, because a party has failed to comply with a local rule. In addition, paragraph (I) requires that the party be alerted to the local rule, and be given a reasonable amount of time to comply with the local rule.

   After the court has alerted the party to the local rule pursuant to paragraph (I), the court may impose a sanction for subsequent noncompliance either on counsel or the defendant if proceeding pro se, but may not dismiss the case, or grant or deny relief because of non-compliance.

   Official Note

   Rule 6 adopted January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; amended May 19, 1987, effective July 1, 1987; renumbered Rule 105 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended October 24, 2000, effective January 1, 2001; Comment revised June 8, 2001, effective immediately; amended October 15, 2004, effective January 1, 2005; amended September 9, 2005, effective February 1, 2006; amended January 25, 2008, effective February 1, 2009.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the October 24, 2000 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 5842 (November 11, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the June 8, 2001 Comment revision citing to the AOPC’s webpage published with the Court’s Order at 31 Pa.B. 3310 (June 23, 2001).

   Final Report explaining the October 15, 2004 amendment to paragraph (A), and to paragraph (C)(3) concerning the Legislative Reference Bureau publication requirements, published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 5893 (October 30, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the September 9, 2005 amendments to paragraph (A) published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 5242 (September 24, 2005).

   Final Report explaining the January 25, 2008 changes to Rule 105 concerning submission of local rules for review prior to adoption published with the Court’s Order at 38 Pa.B. 745 (February 9, 2008).

 (A)  The court or issuing authority may, in the interests of justice, grant a continuance, on its own motion, or on the motion of either party.

 (B)  When the matter is before an issuing authority, the issuing authority shall record on the transcript the identity of the moving party and the reasons for granting or denying the continuance. When the matter is in the court of common pleas, the judge shall on the record identify the moving party and state of record the reasons for granting or denying the continuance.

 (C)  A motion for continuance on behalf of the defendant shall be made not later than 48 hours before the time set for the trial. A later motion shall be entertained only when the opportunity therefor did not previously exist, or the defendant was not aware of the grounds for the motion, or the interests of justice require it.

   Official Note

   Rule 301 adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; amended June 8, 1973, effective July 1, 1973; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; renumbered Rule 106 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 A subpoena in a criminal case shall order the witness named to appear before the court at the date, time, and place specified, and to bring any items identified or described. The subpoena shall also state on whose behalf the witness is being ordered to testify and the identity, address, and phone number of the attorney, if any, who applied for the subpoena.

   The form of subpoena was deleted in 1985 because it is no longer necessary to control the specific form of subpoena by rule.

   It is intended that the subpoena shall be used not only for trial but also for any other stage of the proceedings when a subpoena is issuable, including preliminary hearings, hearings in connection with pretrial and post-trial motions, etc.

   When the subpoena is for the production of documents, records, or things, these should be specified.

   Official Note

   Previous Rule 9016 adopted January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; rescinded November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985. Present Rule 9016 adopted November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985; renumbered Rule 107 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 (A)  A petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging the legality of the petitioner’s detention or confinement in a criminal matter shall be filed with the clerk of courts of the judicial district in which the order directing the petitioner’s detention or confinement was entered.

 (B)  A petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging the conditions of the petitioner’s confinement in a criminal matter shall be filed with the clerk of courts of the judicial district in which the petitioner is confined.

   This rule implements Section 6502(b) of the Judicial Code as it applies to the venue for petitions for writs of habeas corpus in criminal matters, 42 Pa.C.S. §  6502(b). The rule is not intended to affect existing law concerning the availability and scope of habeas corpus relief. The rule also is not intended to apply to proceedings authorized by law for post-conviction remedies. See Section 6503 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §  6503.

   Separate petitions are required under this rule when the petitioner is confined in one judicial district due to an order entered in another judicial district and seeks to challenge both the legality and the conditions of confinement. A petition misfiled in the wrong judicial district under this rule may be transferred to the proper judicial district pursuant to Section 5103 of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. §  5103(a).

   Official Note

   Rule 1701 adopted December 11, 1980, effective April 1, 1981; renumbered Rule 108 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 A defendant shall not be discharged nor shall a case be dismissed because of a defect in the form or content of a complaint, citation, summons, or warrant, or a defect in the procedures of these rules, unless the defendant raises the defect before the conclusion of the trial in a summary case or before the conclusion of the preliminary hearing in a court case, and the defect is prejudicial to the rights of the defendant.

   This rule combines and replaces former Rules 90 and 150.

   This rule clarifies when a defendant should be discharged or a case dismissed because of a defect; it eliminates disputes as to what is an informal defect or a substantive defect. As a condition of relief regardless of whether the defect is in form, content, or procedure, the court or issuing authority must determine that there is actual prejudice to the rights of the defendant.

   A complaint, citation, summons, or warrant may be amended at any time so as to remedy any defect in form or content that is not prejudicial to the rights of the defendant. Nothing in this rule shall prevent the filing of a new complaint or citation and the reissuance of process. Any new complaint or citation must be filed within the time permitted by the applicable statute of limitations.

   Ordinarily, if a defendant does not raise a defect at the summary trial or before the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, the defendant cannot thereafter raise the defect as grounds for dismissal or discharge at a later stage in the proceedings. See Commonwealth v. Krall, 304 A.2d 488 (Pa. 1973). In a summary case, however, the provisions of this rule do not preclude a defendant from raising a defect for the first time after the summary trial when the interests of justice require it, as for example, when the defendant was not represented by counsel during the proceedings before the district justice or when the defendant could not reasonably have discovered the defect until after the conclusion of the summary trial.

   Any defect properly raised under this rule shall be specifically described on the docket by the issuing authority. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 135.

   If the issuing authority determines that a defect is prejudicial, it is intended that the decision recorded on the docket pursuant to Rule 135(B)(12) shall be ‘‘discharge of the defendant’’ or ‘‘dismissal of the case,’’ rather than ‘‘not guilty.’’

   Official Note

   Former Rule 90 adopted July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 109. Former Rule 150, formed from former Rule 114 (Informal Defects), and former Rule 115 (Substantive Defects), both adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; suspended effective May 1, 1970; both revised January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; combined, renumbered Rule 150 and amended September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended April 8, 1982, effective July 1, 1982, Comment revised July 12, 1985, effective January 1, 1986; effective date extended to July 1, 1986; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 109. New Rule 109 adopted March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 In a widely-publicized or sensational case, the court, on motion of either party or on its own motion, may issue a special order governing such matters as extrajudicial statements by parties and witnesses likely to interfere with the rights of the accused to a fair trial by an impartial jury, the seating and conduct in the courtroom of spectators and news media representatives, the management and sequestration of jurors and witnesses, and any other matters that the court may deem appropriate for inclusion in such an order. In such cases, it may be appropriate for the court to consult with representatives of the news media concerning the issuance of such a special order.

   Official Note

   Rule 326 adopted January 25, 1971, effective February 1, 1971; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; renumbered Rule 110 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 All court personnel including, among others, court clerks, bailiffs, tipstaffs, and court stenographers are prohibited from disclosing to any person, without authorization by the court, information relating to a pending criminal case that is not part of the public records of the court. This rule specifically prohibits the divulgence of information concerning arguments and hearings held in chambers or otherwise outside the presence of the public.

   Official Note

   Rule 327 adopted January 25, 1971, effective February 1, 1971; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; renumbered Rule 111 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 (A)  The court or issuing authority shall:

   (1)  prohibit the taking of photographs, video, or motion pictures of any judicial proceedings or in the hearing room or courtroom or its environs during the judicial proceedings; and

   (2)  prohibit the transmission of communications by telephone, radio, television, or advanced communication technology from the hearing room or the courtroom or its environs during the progress of or in connection with any judicial proceedings, whether or not the court is actually in session.

   The environs of the hearing room or courtroom is defined as the area immediately surrounding the entrances and exits to the hearing room or courtroom.

 (B)  The court or issuing authority may permit the taking of photographs, or radio or television broadcasting, or broadcasting by advanced technology, of judicial proceedings, such as naturalization ceremonies or the swearing in of public officials, which may be conducted in the hearing room or courtroom.

 (C)  Except as provided in paragraph (D), the stenographic, mechanical, electronic recording, or the recording using any advanced communication technology, of any judicial proceedings by anyone other than the official court stenographer in a court case, for any purpose, is prohibited.

 (D)  In a judicial proceeding before an issuing authority, the issuing authority, the attorney for the Commonwealth, the affiant, or the defendant may cause a recording to be made of the judicial proceeding as an aid to the preparation of the written record for subsequent use in a case, but such recordings shall not be publicly played or disseminated in any manner unless in a court during a trial or hearing.

 (E)  If it appears to the court or issuing authority that a violation of this rule has resulted in substantial prejudice to the defendant, the court or issuing authority, upon application by the attorney for the Commonwealth or the defendant, may:

   (1)  quash the proceedings at the preliminary hearing and order another preliminary hearing to be held before the same issuing authority at a subsequent time without additional costs being taxed;

   (2)  discharge the defendant on nominal bail if in custody, or continue the bail if at liberty, pending further proceedings;

   (3)  order all costs of the issuing authority forfeited in the original proceedings; or

   (4)  adopt any, all, or combination of these remedies as the nature of the case requires in the interests of justice.

   This rule combines and replaces former Rules 27 and 328.

   ‘‘Recording’’ as used in this rule is not intended to preclude the use of recording devices for the preservation of testimony as permitted by Rules 500 and 501.

   The prohibitions under this rule are not intended to preclude the use of advanced communication technology for purposes of conducting court proceedings.

   Official Note

   Former Rule 27, previously Rule 143, adopted January 31, 1970, effective May 1, 1970; renumbered Rule 27 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended February 15, 1974, effective immediately; Comment revised March 22, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; amended June 19, 1996, effective July 1, 1996; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 112. Former Rule 328 adopted January 25, 1971, effective February 1, 1971; amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; Comment revised March 22, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; rescinded March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001, and replaced by Rule 112. New Rule 112 adopted March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   FORMER RULE 27:

   Final Report explaining the June 19, 1996 amendments to former Rule 27 published with the Court’s Order at 26 Pa.B. 3128 (July 6, 1996).

   NEW RULE 112:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules, and the provisions of Rule 112, published at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the May 10, 2002 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. 2591 (May 25, 2002).

   Official Note

   Former Rule 9024 adopted October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; amended March 22, 1993, effective as to cases in which the determination of guilt occurs on or after January 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 9025 June 2, 1994, effective September 1, 1994. New Rule 9024 adopted June 2, 1994, effective September 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 113 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; rescinded March 3, 2004, and replaced by Rule 114(C), effective July 1, 2004.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Report explaining the provisions of new Rule 9024 published at 23 Pa.B. 5008 (October 23, 1993).

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18,2000).

   Final Report explaining the March 3, 2004 rescission of the rule published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).

 (A)  The clerk of courts shall maintain the criminal case file for the court of common pleas. The criminal case file shall contain all original records, papers, and orders filed in the case, and copies of all court notices. These records, papers, orders, and copies shall not be taken from the custody of the clerk or court without order of the court. Upon request, the clerk shall provide copies at reasonable cost.

 (B)  The clerk of courts shall maintain a list of docket entries: a chronological list, in electronic or written form, of documents and entries in the criminal case file and of all proceedings in the case.

 (C)  The docket entries shall include at a minimum the following information:

   (1)  the defendant’s name;

   (2)  the names and addresses of all attorneys who have appeared or entered an appearance, the date of the entry of appearance, and the date of any withdrawal of appearance;

   (3)  notations concerning all papers filed with the clerk, including all court notices, appearances, pleas, motions, orders, verdicts, findings and judgments, and sentencings, briefly showing the nature and title, if any, of each paper filed, writ issued, plea entered, and motion made, and the substance of each order or judgment of the court and of the returns showing execution of process;

   (4)  notations concerning motions made orally or orders issued orally in the courtroom when directed by the court;

   (5)  a notation of every judicial proceeding, continuance, and disposition;

   (6)  the location of exhibits made part of the record during the proceedings; and

   (7)  all other information required by Rules 114 and 576.

   This rule sets forth the mandatory contents of the list of docket entries and the criminal case files. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of what is required to be recorded in the docket entries. The judicial districts may require additional information be recorded in a case or in all cases.

   The list of docket entries is a running record of all information related to any action in a criminal case in the court of common pleas of the clerk’s county, such as dates of filings, of orders, and of court proceedings. The clerk of courts is required to make docket entries at the time the information is made known to the clerk, and the practice in some counties of creating the list of docket entries only if an appeal is taken is inconsistent with this rule.

   Nothing in this rule is intended to preclude the use of automated or other electronic means for time stamping or making docket entries.

   This rule applies to all proceedings in the court of common pleas at any stage of a criminal case.

   The requirement in paragraph (C)(2) that all attorneys and their addresses be recorded makes certain there is a record of all attorneys who have appeared for any litigant in the case. The requirement also ensures that attorneys are served as required in Rules 114 and 576. See also Rule 576(B)(4) concerning certificates of service.

   In those cases in which the attorney has authorized receiving service by facsimile transmission or electronic means, the docket entry required in paragraph (C)(2) must include the facsimile number or electronic address.

   Paragraph (C)(4) recognizes that occasionally disposition of oral motions presented in open court should be reflected in the docket, such as motions and orders related to omnibus pretrial motions (Rule 578), motions for a mistrial (Rule 605), motions for changes in bail (Rule 529), and oral motions for extraordinary relief (Rule 704(B)).

   Official Note

   Former Rule 9024 adopted October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; amended March 22, 1993, effective as to cases in which the determination of guilt occurs on or after January 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 9025 June 2, 1994, effective September 1, 1994. New Rule 9024 adopted June 2, 1994, effective September 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 113 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; rescinded March 3, 2004 and replaced by Rule 114(C), effective July 1, 2004. New Rule 113 adopted March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the provisions of the new rule published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).

 (A) Filing

   (1)  All orders and court notices promptly shall be transmitted to the clerk of courts’ office for filing. Upon receipt in the clerk of courts’ office, the order or court notice promptly shall be time stamped with the date of receipt.

   (2)  All orders and court notices promptly shall be placed in the criminal case file.

 (B)  Service

   (1)  A copy of any order or court notice promptly shall be served on each party’s attorney, or the party if unrepresented.

   (2)  The clerk of courts shall serve the order or court notice, unless the president judge has promulgated a local rule designating service to be by the court or court administrator.

   (3)  Methods of Service

 Except as otherwise provided in Chapter 5 concerning notice of the preliminary hearing, service shall be:

     (a)   in writing by

       (i)   personal delivery to the party’s attorney or, if unrepresented, the party; or

       (ii)   personal delivery to the party’s attorney’s employee at the attorney’s office; or

       (iii)   mailing a copy to the party’s attorney or leaving a copy for the attorney at the attorney’s office; or

       (iv)   in those judicial districts that maintain in the courthouse assigned boxes for counsel to receive service, when counsel has agreed to receive service by this method, leaving a copy for the party’s attorney in the box in the courthouse assigned to the attorney for service; or

       (v)   sending a copy to an unrepresented party by certified, registered, or first class mail addressed to the party’s place of residence, business, or confinement; or

       (vi)   sending a copy by facsimile transmission or other electronic means if the party’s attorney, or the party if unrepresented, has filed a written request for this method of service or has included a facsimile number or an electronic address on a prior legal paper filed in the case; or

       (vii)   delivery to the party’s attorney, or the party if unrepresented, by carrier service; or

     (b)   orally in open court on the record.

 (C)  Docket Entries

   (1)  Docket entries promptly shall be made.

   (2)  The docket entries shall contain:

     (a)   the date of receipt in the clerk’s office of the order or court notice;

     (b)   the date appearing on the order or court notice; and

     (c)   the date of service of the order or court notice.

 (D)  Unified Practice

 Any local rule that is inconsistent with the provisions of this rule is prohibited, including any local rule requiring a party to file or serve orders or court notices.

   This rule was amended in 2004 to provide in one rule the procedures for the filing and service of all orders and court notices, and for making docket entries of the date of receipt, date appearing on the order or notice, and the date of service. This rule incorporates the provisions of former Rule 113 (Notice of Court Proceedings Requiring Defendant’s Presence). But see Rules 511, 540(F)(2), and 542(D) for the procedures for service of notice of a preliminary hearing, which are different from the procedures in this rule.

   Historically, some orders or court notices have been served by the court administrator or by the court. Paragraph (B)(2) permits the president judge to continue this practice by designating either the court or the court administrator to serve orders and court notices. When the president judge makes such a designation, the designation must be in the form of a local rule promulgated in compliance with Rule 105 (Local Rules).

   Paragraph (C)(2) requires three dates to be entered in the list of docket entries with regard to the court’s orders and notices: the date of receipt of the order or notice; the date appearing on the order or notice; and the date the order or notice is served. The date of receipt is the date of filing under these rules. Concerning appeal periods and entry of orders, see Rule 720 (Post-Sentence Procedures; Appeal) and Pa.R.A.P. 108 (Date of Entry of Orders).

   Court notices, as used in this rule, are communications that ordinarily are issued by a judge or the court administrator concerning, for example, calendaring or scheduling, including proceedings requiring the defendant’s presence.

   Although paragraph (B)(3)(a)(iv) permits the use of assigned mailboxes for service under this rule, the Attorney General’s office never may be served by this method.

   A facsimile number or an electronic address set forth on letterhead is not sufficient to authorize service by facsimile transmission or other electronic means under paragraph (B)(3)(a)(vi). The authorization for service by facsimile transmission or other electronic means under this rule is valid only for the duration of the case. A separate authorization must be filed in each case the party or attorney wants to receive documents by this method of service.

   Nothing in this rule is intended to preclude the use of automated or other electronic means for the transmission of the orders or court notices between the judge, court administrator, and clerk of courts, or for time stamping or making docket entries.

   Under the post-sentence motion procedures, the clerk of courts must comply with this rule after entering an order denying a post-sentence motion by operation of law. See Rule 720(B)(3)(c).

   This rule makes it clear that the procedures for filing and service, and making docket entries are mandatory and may not be modified by local rule.

   Paragraph (D), titled ‘‘Unified Practice,’’ emphasizes that local rules must not conflict with the statewide rules. Although this prohibition on local rules that are inconsistent with the statewide rules applies to all Criminal Rules through Rule 105 (Local Rules), the reference to the specific prohibitions is included because these types of local rules have been identified by practitioners as creating significant impediments to the statewide practice of law within the unified judicial system. See the first paragraph of the Rule 105 Comment. The term ‘‘local rule’’ includes every rule, regulation, directive, policy, custom, usage, form or order of general application. See Rule 105(A).

   For the definition of ‘‘carrier service,’’ see Rule 103.

   See Rule 103 for the definitions of ‘‘clerk of courts’’ and ‘‘court administrator.’’

   See Rule 113 (Criminal Case File and Docket Entries) for the requirements concerning the contents of the criminal case file and the minimum information to be included in the docket entries.

   Official Note

   Formerly Rule 9024, adopted October 21, 1983, effective January 1, 1984; amended March 22, 1993, effective as to cases in which the determination of guilt occurs on or after January 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 9025 and Comment revised June 2, 1994, effective September 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 114 and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; amended August 24, 2004, effective August 1, 2005; amended July 20, 2006, effective September 1, 2006.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 22, 1993 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 23 Pa.B. 1699 (April 10, 1993).

   Report explaining the June 2, 1994 rule changes published at 23 Pa.B. 5008 (October 23, 1993).

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the March 3, 2004 rule changes concerning filing and service, making docket entries, and orders and court notices published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the August 24, 2004 changes concerning notice of preliminary hearing published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 5025 (September 11, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the July 20, 2006 deletion of ‘‘manner of service’’ from paragraph (C)(2)(c) published with the Court’s Order at 36 Pa.B. 4173 (August 5, 2006).

 (A)  In court cases, after a defendant has been held for court, proceedings in open court shall be recorded.

 (B)  Upon the motion of any party, upon its own motion, or as required by law, the court shall determine and designate those portions of the record, if any, that are to be transcribed.

 (C)  At any time before an appeal is taken the court may correct or modify the record in the same manner as is provided by Rule 1926 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure.

   Some form of record or transcript is necessary to permit meaningful consideration of claims of error and an adequate effective appellate review. See, e.g., Pa.Rs.A.P. 1922, 1923, 1924; Commonwealth v. Fields, 387 A.2d 83 (Pa. 1978); Commonwealth v. Shields, 383 A.2d 844 (Pa. 1978). No substantative change in law is intended by this rule, rather it is intended to provide a mechanism to insure appropriate recording and transcribing of court proceedings. For repeal of statutory provisions on this subject, see Judiciary Act Repealer Act §  2(a); 42 P. S. §  20002(a) [897], [944].

   The rule is intended also to apply to proceedings that occur after the action that is the functional equivalent of holding a defendant for court in those cases in which it is permissible to proceed without a preliminary hearing and, therefore, without specifically holding the defendant for court. See Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 541, 550(D), 561, 565, 1010. In addition, the rule is intended to apply to de novo proceedings in the common pleas courts on appeals in summary cases. For application of the rule to proceedings in the Philadelphia Municipal Court, see Pa.R.Crim.P. 1012(A).

   The rule is not intended to preclude adoption of local rules of court providing that arraignment need not be recorded, see Pa.R.Crim.P. 571, nor it is intended to modify any Rules of Criminal Procedure that specifically prohibit the recording or transcribing of all or part of a proceeding. See Pa.R.Crim.P. 313. In addition, the rule is not meant to preclude the use of recording devices for the preservation of testimony under Pa.Rs.Crim.P. 500 and 501.

   Paragraph (B) of the rule is intended to authorize courts to require transcription of only such portions of the record, if any, as are needed to review claims of error.

   Paragraph (C) provides a method for correcting and modifying transcripts before appeal by incorporating Pa.R.A.P. 1926, which otherwise applies only after an appeal has been taken. It is intended that the same standards and procedures apply both before and after appeal.

   Official Note

   Rule 9030 adopted April 24, 1981, effective July 1, 1981; Comment revised March 22, 1989, effective July 1, 1989; renumbered Rule 115 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

 The President Judge shall be responsible for ensuring that the judicial district is in compliance with the Pennsylvania Rules of Criminal Procedure, other rules, and statutes, applicable to the minor judiciary, courts, clerks of courts, and court administrators.

   By this rule, the Supreme Court is imposing on the president judges the responsibility of supervising their respective judicial districts to ensure compliance with the statewide Rules of Criminal Procedure, other rules, and statutes.

   See 42 Pa.C.S. § §  2756 and 2757 concerning the duties of the clerks of courts.

   Official Note

   Adopted March 3, 2004, effective July 1, 2004.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining new Rule 116 published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1561 (March 20, 2004).

 (A)  The president judge of each judicial district shall ensure sufficient availability of issuing authorities to provide the services required by the Rules of Criminal Procedure as follows:

   (1)  continuous coverage for the issuance of search warrants pursuant to Rule 203 and arrest warrants pursuant to Rule 513;

   (2)  coverage using one or a combination of the systems of coverage set forth in paragraph (B) to:

     (a)   conduct summary trials or set collateral in summary cases following arrests with a warrant issued pursuant to Rule 430(A) as provided in Rule 431(B)(3) and following arrests without a warrant as provided in Rule 441(C);

     (b)   conduct preliminary arraignments without unnecessary delay whenever a warrant of arrest is executed within the judicial district pursuant to Rule 516;

     (c)   set bail without unnecessary delay whenever an out-of-county warrant of arrest is executed within the judicial district pursuant to Rule 517(A);

     (d)   accept complaints and conduct preliminary arraignments without unnecessary delay whenever a case is initiated by an arrest without warrant pursuant to Rule 519(A)(1); and

   (3)  coverage during normal business hours for all other business.

 (B)  The president judge, taking into consideration the rights of the defendant and the judicial district’s resources and coverage needs, by local rule promulgated pursuant to Rule 105, shall establish one or a combination of the following systems of coverage to provide the services enumerated in paragraph (A)(2):

   (1)  a traditional on-call system providing continuous coverage;

   (2)  an ‘‘after-hours court’’ or a ‘‘night court’’ staffed by an on-duty issuing authority and staff;

   (3)  a regional on-call system; or

   (4)  a schedule of specified times for after-hours coverage when the ‘‘duty’’ issuing authority will be available to conduct business.

 (C)  The president judge of each judicial district, by local rule promulgated pursuant to Rule 105, shall ensure that coverage is provided pursuant to Rule 520(B) to admit defendants to bail on any day and at any time in any case pending within the judicial district.

   By this rule, the Supreme Court is clarifying the responsibility of president judges in supervising their respective judicial districts to ensure compliance with the statewide Rules of Criminal Procedure to prevent the violation of the rights of defendants caused by the lack of availability of the issuing authority. See also Rule 116 (General Supervisory Powers of President Judge) and Rule 131 (Location of Proceedings Before Issuing Authority).

   Paragraph (A), derived from former Rule 132(A) (Continuous Availability), clarifies that it is the president judge’s responsibility to make sure that there are issuing authorities available within his or her judicial district (1) on a continuous basis to issue search and arrest warrants, paragraph (A)(1); (2) pursuant to one or a combination of the systems of coverage enumerated in paragraph (B) to conduct summary trials and preliminary arraignments, and perform related duties, paragraph (A)(2); and (3) during normal business hours to conduct all other business of the minor judiciary, paragraph (A)(3). It is expected that the president judge will continue the established procedures in the judicial district or establish new procedures to ensure sufficient availability of issuing authorities consistent with this paragraph.

   By providing the alternate systems of coverage in paragraph (B), this rule recognizes the differences in the geography and judicial resources the judicial districts.

   An issuing authority is ‘‘available’’ pursuant to paragraph (A) when he or she is able to communicate in person or by using advanced communication technology (‘‘ACT’’) with the person requesting services pursuant to this rule. See Rule 103 for the definition of ACT. Concerning the use of ACT, see Rule 118 (Use of Two-Way Simultaneous Audio-Visual Communication in Criminal Proceedings). See also Rules 203, 513, 518, and 540 providing for the use of ACT to request and obtain warrants and conduct preliminary arraignments.

   Nothing in this rule limits an issuing authority from exercising sound judicial discretion, within the parameters established by the president judge pursuant to paragraph (B), in deciding how to respond to a request for services outside normal business hours. See, e.g., Rule 509, paragraphs (1) and (2), that authorize the use of summonses instead of warrants in certain court cases; and Rule 519(B) that requires the police officer to release a defendant arrested without a warrant in certain specified court cases.

   In determining which system of coverage to elect, the president judge must consider the rights of the defendant, see, e.g. Commonwealth v. Duncan, 514 Pa. 395, 525 A.2d 1177 (1987), and the judicial district’s resources and coverage needs, as well as the obligations of the police and attorney for the Commonwealth to ensure the defendant is brought before an issuing authority without unnecessary delay as required by law, see, e.g., Rules 431, 441, 516, 517, and 519. See also Commonwealth v. Perez, 577 Pa. 360, 845 A.2d 779 (2004).

   When the police must detain a defendant pursuant to these rules, 61 P. S. §  798 provides that the defendant may be housed for a period not to exceed 48 hours in ‘‘the borough and township lockups and city or county prisons.’’

   The proceedings enumerated in paragraph (A)(2) include (1) setting bail before verdict pursuant to Rule 520(A) and Rule 540, and either admitting the defendant to bail or committing the defendant to jail, and (2) determining probable cause whenever a defendant is arrested without a warrant pursuant to Rule 540(C).

   Pursuant to paragraph (C), the president judge also is responsible for making sure there is an issuing authority or other designated official available within the judicial district on a continuous basis to accept bail pursuant to Rule 520(B). The president judge, by local rule, may continue established procedures or establish new procedures for the after-hours acceptance of deposits of bail by an issuing authority, a representative of the office of the clerk of courts, or such other individual designated by the president judge. See Rule 535(A). Given the complexities of posting real estate to satisfy a monetary condition of release, posting of real estate may not be feasible outside normal business hours.

   When the president judge designates another official to accept bail deposits, that official’s authority is limited under this rule to accepting the bail deposit, and under Rule 525 to releasing the defendant upon execution of the bail bond. Pursuant to Rule 535(A), the official is authorized only to have the defendant execute the bail bond and to deliver the bail deposit and bail bond to the issuing authority or clerk of courts.

   The local rule requirements in paragraphs (B) and (C):

   (1) ensure there is adequate notice of (a) the system of coverage, thereby providing predictability in the issuing authority’s duty schedule, and (b) the official authorized to accept bail; (2) promote the efficient administration of justice; and (3) provide a means for the Supreme Court to monitor the times and manner of coverage in each judicial district.

   The local rules promulgated pursuant to this rule should include other relevant information, such as what are the normal business hours of operation or any special locations designated by the president judge to conduct business, that will assist the defendants, defense counsel, attorneys for the Commonwealth, police, and members of the public.

   Concerning other requirements for continuous coverage by issuing authorities in Protection from Abuse Act cases, see 23 Pa.C.S. §  6110 and Pa.R.C.P.D.J. 1203.

   Official Note

   Former Rule 117 adopted September 20, 2002, effective January 1, 2003; renumbered Rule 118 June 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006. New Rule 117 adopted June 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the provisions of the new rule published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 3911 (July 16, 2005).

 When a criminal proceeding is conducted by using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication, the court shall not impose a fee upon the defendant for its use.

   This rule implements the March 13, 2002 Order of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (No. 241 Judicial Administration; Doc. No. 1) that states, ‘‘No fees shall be imposed against a defendant in a criminal proceeding for the utilization of advanced communication technology.’’ See 32 Pa.B. 1642 (March 30, 2002). When a criminal proceeding is conducted using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication, this rule precludes the imposition of fees upon a defendant for the use of the two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication. See, e.g., Rules 540 (Preliminary Arraignment) and 571 (Arraignment). Two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication is a type of advanced communication technology as defined in Rule 103 (Definitions).

   A ‘‘fee’’ as used in this rule includes, but is not limited to, a cost, charge, surcharge, and service charge.

   Official Note

   New Rule 117 adopted September 20, 2002, effective January 1, 2003; renumbered Rule 118 June 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining new Rule 117 published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. 4815 (October 4, 2002).

   Final Report explaining the June 30, 2005 renumbering of Rule 117 as Rule 118 published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 3911 (July 16, 2005).

 (A)  The court or issuing authority may use two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication at any criminal proceeding except:

   (1)  preliminary hearings;

   (2)  proceedings pursuant to Rule 569(A)(2)(b);

   (3)  trials;

   (4)  sentencing hearings;

   (5)  parole, probation, and intermediate punishment revocation hearings; and

   (6)  any proceeding in which the defendant has a constitutional or statutory right to be physically present.

 (B)  The defendant may consent to any proceeding being conducted using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication.

 (C)  When counsel for the defendant is present, the defendant must be permitted to communicate fully and confidentially with defense counsel immediately prior to and during the proceeding.

   This rule was adopted in 2003 to make it clear that unless the case comes within one of the exceptions in paragraph (A), the court or issuing authority may use two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication in any criminal proceeding. Two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication is a type of advanced communication technology as defined in Rule 103.

   Nothing in this rule is intended to limit any right of a defendant to waive his or her presence at a criminal proceeding in the same manner as the defendant may waive other rights. See, e.g., Rule 602 Comment. Negotiated guilty pleas when the defendant has agreed to the sentence and probation revocation hearings are examples of hearings in which the defendant’s consent to proceed using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication would be required. Hearings on post-sentence motions, bail hearings, bench warrant hearings, extradition hearings, and Gagnon I hearings are examples of proceedings that may be conducted using two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication without the defendant’s consent. It is expected the court or issuing authority would conduct a colloquy for the defendant’s consent when the defendant’s constitutional right to be physically present is implicated.

   Within the meaning of this rule, counsel is present when physically with the defendant or with the judicial officer conducting the criminal proceeding.

   This rule does not apply to preliminary arraignments (Rule 540), arraignments (Rule 571), or to search warrant (Rule 203) and arrest warrant (Chapter 5 Part B(3)) procedures.

   This rule is not intended to preclude the use of advanced communication technology for the preservation of testimony as permitted by Rules 500 and 501.

   See Rule 542 for the procedures governing preliminary hearings.

   See Chapter 6 for the procedures governing trials.

   See Chapter 7 for the procedures governing sentencing hearings.

   See Rule 708 for the procedures governing revocation of probation, intermediate punishment, and parole.

   The paragraph (A)(5) reference to revocation hearings addresses Gagnon II-type probation (Gagnon v. Scarpelli, 411 U.S. 778 (1973)) and parole (Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471 (1972)) revocation hearings, and is not intended to prohibit the use of two-way simultaneous audio-visual communication in hearings to determine probable cause (Gagnon I).

   Official Note

   New Rule 118 adopted August 7, 2003, effective September 1, 2003; renumbered Rule 119 and Comment revised June 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006; amended January 27, 2006, efffective August 1, 2006.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining new Rule 118 published with the Court’s Order at 33 Pa.B. 4287 (August 30, 2003).

   Final Report explaining the June 30, 2005 renumbering of Rule 118 as Rule 119 and the revision of the second paragraph of the Comment published at 35 Pa.B. 3911 (July 16, 2005).

   Final Report explaining the January 27, 2006 amendments adding Rule 569 proceedings as a proceeding for which ACT may not be used published with the Court’s Order at 36 Pa.B. 700 (February 11, 2006).

   The provisions of this Rule 118 adopted August 7, 2003, effective September 1, 2003, 33 Pa.B. 4287; amended June 30, 2005, effective August 1, 2006, 33 Pa.B. 3901; amended January 27, 2006, effective August 1, 2006, 36 Pa.B. 694. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (312402) to (312403).

PART B. Counsel

Rule 120. Attorneys—Appearances and Withdrawals.

 (A)  ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

   (1)  Counsel for defendant shall file an entry of appearance with the clerk of courts promptly after being retained, and serve a copy of the entry of appearance on the attorney for the Commonwealth.

     (a)   If a firm name is entered, the name of an individual lawyer shall be designated as being responsible for the conduct of the case.

     (b)   The entry of appearance shall include the attorney’s address, phone number, and attorney ID number.

   (2)  When counsel is appointed pursuant to Rule 122 (Appointment of Counsel), the filing of the appointment order shall enter the appearance of appointed counsel.

   (3)  Counsel shall not be permitted to represent a defendant following a preliminary hearing unless an entry of appearance is filed with the clerk of courts.

     (4)   An attorney who has been retained or appointed by the court shall continue such representation through direct appeal or until granted leave to withdraw by the court pursuant to paragraph (B).

 (B)  WITHDRAWAL OF APPEARANCE

   (1)  Counsel for a defendant may not withdraw his or her appearance except by leave of court.

   (2)  A motion to withdraw shall be:

     (a)   filed with the clerk of courts, and a copy concurrently served on the attorney for the Commonwealth and the defendant; or

     (b)   made orally on the record in open court in the presence of the defendant.

     (3)   Upon granting leave to withdraw, the court shall determine whether new counsel is entering an appearance, new counsel is being appointed to represent the defendant, or the defendant is proceeding without counsel.

   Representation as used in this rule is intended to cover court appearances or the filing of formal motions. Investigation, interviews, or other similar pretrial matters are not prohibited by this rule.

   Paragraph (A)(2) was added in 2005 to make it clear that the filing of an order appointing counsel to represent a defendant enters the appearance of appointed counsel. Appointed counsel does not have to file a separate entry of appearance. Rule 122 (Appointment of Counsel) requires that (1) the judge include in the appointment order the name, address, and phone number of appointed counsel, and (2) the order be served on the defendant, appointed counsel, the previous attorney of record, if any, and the attorney for the Commonwealth pursuant to Rule 114 (Orders and Court Notices: Filing; Service; and Docket Entries).

   An attorney may not represent a defendant in a capital case unless the attorney meets the educational and experiental requirements set forth in Rule 801 (Qualifications for Defense Counsel in Capital Cases).

   Under paragraph (B)(2), counsel must file a motion to withdraw in all cases, and counsel’s obligation to represent the defendant, whether as retained or appointed counsel, remains until leave to withdraw is granted by the court. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Librizzi, 810 A.2d 692 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2002). The court must make a determination of the status of a case before permitting counsel to withdraw. Although there are many factors considered by the court in determining whether there is good cause to permit the withdrawal of counsel, when granting leave, the court should determine whether new counsel will be stepping in or the defendant is proceeding without counsel, and that the change in attorneys will not delay the proceedings or prejudice the defendant, particularly concerning time limits. In addition, case law suggests other factors the court should consider, such as whether (1) the defendant has failed to meet his or her financial obligations to pay for the attorney’s services and (2) there is a written contractual agreement between counsel and the defendant terminating representation at a specified stage in the proceedings such as sentencing. See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Roman. Appeal of Zaiser, 549 A.2d 1320 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988).

   If a post-sentence motion is filed, trial counsel would normally be expected to stay in the case until disposition of the motion under the post-sentence procedures adopted in 1993. See Rules 704 and 720. Traditionally, trial counsel stayed in a case through post-verdict motions and sentencing.

   For the filing and service procedures, see Rules 575-576.

   For waiver of counsel, see Rule 121.

   For the procedures for appointment of counsel, see Rule 122.

   See Rule 904(A) that requires an attorney who has been retained to represent a defendant during post-conviction collateral proceedings to file a written entry of appearance.

   Official Note

   Adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; formerly Rule 303, renumbered Rule 302 and amended June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; amended March 22, 1993, effective January 1, 1994; renumbered Rule 120 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; Comment revised February 26, 2002, effective July 1, 2002; Comment revised June 4, 2004, effective November 1, 2004; amended April 28, 2005, effective August 1, 2005.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 22, 1993 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 23 Pa.B. 1699 (April 10, 1993).

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaning the February 26, 2002 Comment revision adding the cross-reference to Rule 904 published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. 1393 (March 16, 2002).

   Final Report explaining the April 28, 2005 amendments concerning the filing of an appointment order as entry of appearance for appointed counsel and withdrawal of counsel published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 2859 (May 14, 2005).

 (A)  GENERALLY.

   (1)  The defendant may waive the right to be represented by counsel.

   (2)  To ensure that the defendant’s waiver of the right to counsel is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, the judge or issuing authority, at a minimum, shall elicit the following information from the defendant:

     (a)   that the defendant understands that he or she has the right to be represented by counsel, and the right to have free counsel appointed if the defendant is indigent;

     (b)   that the defendant understands the nature of the charges against the defendant and the elements of each of those charges;

     (c)   that the defendant is aware of the permissible range of sentences and/or fines for the offenses charged;

     (d)   that the defendant understands that if he or she waives the right to counsel, the defendant will still be bound by all the normal rules of procedure and that counsel would be familiar with these rules;

     (e)   that the defendant understands that there are possible defenses to these charges that counsel might be aware of, and if these defenses are not raised at trial, they may be lost permanently; and

     (f)   that the defendant understands that, in addition to defenses, the defendant has many rights that, if not timely asserted, may be lost permanently; and that if errors occur and are not timely objected to, or otherwise timely raised by the defendant, these errors may be lost permanently.

   (3)  The judge or issuing authority may permit the attorney for the Commonwealth or defendant’s attorney to conduct the examination of the defendant pursuant to paragraph (A)(2). The judge or issuing authority shall be present during this examination.

 (B)  PROCEEDINGS BEFORE AN ISSUING AUTHORITY. When the defendant seeks to waive the right to counsel in a summary case or for a preliminary hearing in a court case, the issuing authority shall ascertain from the defendant whether this is a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of counsel. In addition, the waiver shall be in writing,

   (1)  signed by the defendant, with a representation that the defendant was told of the right to be represented and to have an attorney appointed if the defendant cannot afford one, and that the defendant chooses to act as his or her own attorney at the hearing or trial; and

   (2)  signed by the issuing authority, with a certification that the defendant’s waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.

 The waiver shall be made a part of the record.

 (C)  PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A JUDGE. When the defendant seeks to waive the right to counsel after the preliminary hearing, the judge shall ascertain from the defendant, on the record, whether this is a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of counsel.

 (D)  STANDBY COUNSEL. When the defendant’s waiver of counsel is accepted, standby counsel may be appointed for the defendant. Standby counsel shall attend the proceedings and shall be available to the defendant for consultation and advice.

   Paragraph (A) recognizes that the right to self-representation is guaranteed by the sixth amendment to the Federal Constitution when a valid waiver is made, Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).

   Court decisions contain broad language in referring to the areas and matters to be encompassed in determining whether the defendant understands the full impact and consequences of his or her waiver of the right to counsel, but is nevertheless willing to waive that right. The appellate courts require, however, at a minimum, that the judge or issuing authority ask questions to elicit the information set forth in paragraph (A)(2).

   Although it is advisable that the judge or issuing authority conduct the examination of the defendant, the rule does not prevent the attorney for the Commonwealth or an already-appointed or retained defense counsel from conducting all or part of the examination of the defendant as permitted by the judge or issuing authority. See Commonwealth v. McDonough, 571 Pa. 232, 812 A.2d 504 (2002).

   On the issue of waiver of counsel in general, see, e.g., Commonwealth v. Tyler, 468 Pa. 193, 360 A.2d 617 (1976); Commonwealth ex rel. Fairman v. Cavell, 423 Pa. 138, 222 A.2d 722 (1966) (mere execution of a waiver of counsel form, without more, is insufficient to establish a valid waiver); Commonwealth ex rel. McCray v. Rundle, 415 Pa. 65, 202 A.2d 303 (1964); Commonwealth ex rel. O’Lock v. Rundle, 415 Pa. 515, 204 A.2d 439 (1964).

   In referring to summary cases, paragraph (B) refers only to those summary cases in which there exists a right to counsel. See Rule 122.

   While the rule continues to require a written waiver of counsel incorporating the contents specified in paragraph (B), in proceedings before an issuing authority, the form of waiver was deleted in 1985 because it is no longer necessary to control the specific form of written waiver by rule.

   Under paragraph (C) of this rule, the colloquy relating to the defendant’s attempted waiver of counsel must appear on the record. This requirement is not applicable to such waivers in proceedings under paragraph (B), because these proceedings are not in courts of record. However, the absence of such requirement is not intended to be construed as affecting the scope or nature of the inquiry to be made in a particular case.

   It is intended that when the defendant has waived his or her right to counsel before the issuing authority for purposes of the preliminary hearing, such waiver shall not normally act as a waiver of the right to counsel in subsequent critical stages of the proceedings. Therefore, under paragraph (C) it is intended that a further waiver is subsequently to be taken by a judge of the court of common pleas.

   With respect to trials in court cases, when the defendant waives the right to counsel and elects to proceed pro se, it is generally advisable that standby counsel be appointed to attend the proceedings and be available to the defendant for consultation and advice. See Commonwealth v. Africa, 466 Pa. 603, 353 A.2d 855 (1976). This is particularly true in cases expected to be long or complicated, or in which there are multiple defendants. See ABA Standards, The Function of the Trial Judge §  6.7 (Approved Draft 1972). The ability of standby counsel to assume control of the defense will minimize delay and disruption of the proceedings in the event that the defendant’s self-representation terminates, e.g., either because such termination becomes necessary as a result of the defendant’s unruly behavior, or because the defendant seeks to withdraw the waiver and be represented by counsel. With respect to pretrial proceedings or summary case trials it is intended that standby counsel may be appointed at the discretion of the presiding judicial officer.

   Official Note

   Rule 318 adopted October 21, 1977, effective January 1, 1978; amended November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985; renumbered Rule 121 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended December 19, 2007, effective February 1, 2008.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the December 19, 2007 changes to paragraph (A) concerning areas of inquiry for waiver colloquy published with the Court’s Order at 38 Pa.B. 62 (January 5, 2008).

 (A)  Counsel shall be appointed:

   (1)  in all summary cases, for all defendants who are without financial resources or who are otherwise unable to employ counsel when there is a likelihood that imprisonment will be imposed;

   (2)  in all court cases, prior to the preliminary hearing to all defendants who are without financial resources or who are otherwise unable to employ counsel;

   (3)  in all cases, by the court, on its own motion, when the interests of justice require it.

 (B)  When counsel is appointed,

   (1)  the judge shall enter an order indicating the name, address, and phone number of the appointed counsel, and the order shall be served on the defendant, the appointed counsel, the previous attorney of record, if any, and the attorney for the Commonwealth pursuant to Rule 114 (Orders and Court Notices: Filing; Service; and Docket Entries); and

   (2)  the appointment shall be effective until final judgment, including any proceedings upon direct appeal.

 (C)  A motion for change of counsel by a defendant for whom counsel has been appointed shall not be granted except for substantial reasons.

   This rule is designed to implement the decisions of Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U. S. (1972), and Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U. S. 1 (1970), that no defendant in a summary case be sentenced to imprisonment unless the defendant was represented at trial by counsel, and that every defendant in a court case has counsel starting no later than the preliminary hearing stage.

   No defendant may be sentenced to imprisonment or probation if the right to counsel was not afforded at trial. See Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U. S.654 (2002) and Scott v. Illinois, 440 U. S. 367 (1979). See rule 454 (Trial in Summary Cases) concerning the right to counsel at a summary trial.

   Appointment of counsel can be waived, if such waiver is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. See Faretta v. California, 422 U. S. 806 (1975). Concerning the appointment of standby counsel for the defendant who elects to proceed pro se, see Rule 121.

   In both summary and court cases, the appointment of counsel to represent indigent defendants remains in effect until all appeals on direct review have been completed.

   Ideally, counsel should be appointed to represent indigent defendants immediately after they are brought before the issuing authority in all summary cases in which a jail sentence is possible, and immediately after preliminary arraignment in all court cases. This rule strives to accommodate the requirements of the Supreme Court of the United States to the practical problems of implementation. Thus, in summary cases, paragraph (A)(1) requires a pretrial determination by the issuing authority as to whether a jail sentence would be likely in the event of a finding of guilt in order to determine whether trial counsel should be appointed to represent indigent defendants. It is expected that the issuing authorities in most instances will be guided by their experience with the particular offense with which defendants are charged. This is the procedure recommended by the ABA Standards Relating to Providing Defense Services §  4.1 (Approved Draft 1968) and cited in the United States Supreme Court’s opinion in Argersinger, supra. If there is any doubt, the issuing authority can seek the advice of the attorney for the Commonwealth, if one is prosecuting the case, as to whether the Commonwealth intends to recommend a jail sentence in case of conviction.

   In court cases, paragraph (A)(2) requires counsel to be appointed at least in time to represent the defendant at preliminary hearing. Although difficulty may be experienced in some judicial districts in meeting the Coleman requirement, it is believed that this is somewhat offset by the prevention of many post-conviction proceedings that would otherwise be brought based on the denial of the right to counsel. However, there may be cases in which counsel has not been appointed prior to the preliminary hearing stage of the proceedings; e.g., counsel for the preliminary hearing has been waived, or a then-ineligible defendant subsequently becomes eligible for appointed counsel. In such cases it is expected that the defendant’s right to appointed counsel will be effectuated at the earliest appropriate time.

   An attorney may not be appointed to represent a defendant in a capital case unless the attorney meets the educational and experiential requirements set forth in Rule 801 (Qualifications for Defense Counsel in Capital Cases).

   Paragraph (A)(3) retains in the issuing authority or judge the power to appoint counsel regardless of indigency or other factors when, in the issuing authority’s or judge’s opinion, the interests of justice require it.

   Pursuant to paragraph (B)(2) counsel retains his or her appointment until final judgment, which includes all avenues of appeal through the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. In making the decision whether to file a petition for allowance of appeal, counsel must (1) consult with his or her client, and (2) review the standards set forth in Pa.R.A.P. 1114 (Considerations Governing Allowance of Appeal) and the note following that rule. If the decision is made to file a petition, counsel must carry through with that decision. See Commonwealth v. Liebel, 825 A.2d 630 (Pa. 2003). Concerning counsel’s obligations as appointed counsel, see Jones v. Barnes, 463 U.S. 745 (1983). See also Commonwealth v. Padden, 783 A.2d 299 (Pa. Super.2001).

   For suspension of Acts of Assembly, see Rule 1101.

   Official Note

   Rule 318 adopted November 29, 1972, effective 10 days hence, replacing prior rule; amended September 18, 1973, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 316 and amended June 29, 1977, and October 21, 1977, effective January 1, 1978; renumbered Rule 122 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended March 12, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; Comment revised March 26, 2004, effective July 1, 2004; Comment revised June 4, 2004, effective November 1, 2004; amended April 28, 2005, effective August 1, 2005.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1478 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the March 12, 2004 editorial amendment to paragraph (C)(3), and the Comment revision concerning duration of counsel’s obligation, published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1672 (March 27, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the March 26, 2004 Comment revision concerning Alabama v. Shelton published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 1931 (April 10, 2004).

   Final Report explaining the April 28, 2005 changes concerning the contents of the appointment order published with the Court’s Order at 35 Pa.B. 2859 (May 14, 2005).

 A defendant who requests assignment of counsel in a court case shall file a signed and verified application for assignment of counsel, which shall set forth the facts showing that the defendant is without financial resources or is otherwise unable to employ counsel.

   While this rule continues to require a written application for the assignment of counsel, the form of the application was deleted in 1985 because it is no longer necessary to control the specific form of written application by rule.

   Official Note

   Rule 318A adopted June 30, 1964, effective January 1, 1965; renumbered Rule 317 June 29, 1977 and November 22, 1977, effective as to cases in which the indictment or information is filed on or after January 1, 1978; rescinded November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985. Present Rule 317 adopted November 9, 1984, effective January 2, 1985; renumbered Rule 123 and title and Comment revised March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

PART C. Venue, Location, and Recording of Proceedings
before Issuing Authority

Rule 130. Venue; Transfer of Proceedings.

 (A)  VENUE

 All criminal proceedings in summary and court cases shall be brought before the issuing authority for the magisterial district which in the offense is alleged to have occurred or before an issuing authority on temporary assignment to serve such magisterial district, subject, however, to the following exceptions:

   (1)  A criminal proceeding may be brought before any issuing authority of any magisterial district within the judicial district whenever the particular place within the judicial district which the offense is alleged to have occurred in unknown.

   (2)  When changes arising from the same criminal episode occur in more than one magisterial district within the same judicial district, the criminal proceeding on all the charges should be brought before one issuing authority in any one of the magisterial districts in which the charges arising from the same criminal episode occurred.

   (3)  When charges arising from the criminal episode occur in more than one judicial district, the criminal proceeding on all the charges may be brought before one issuing authority in a magisterial district within any of the judicial districts in which the charges arising from the same criminal episode occurred.

   (4)  Whenever an arrest is made without a warrant for any summary offense arising under the Vehicle Code, which allegedly occurred on a highway of the Pennsylvania Turnpike System or any controlled or limited access highway, or any right-of-way of such System or highway, or any other highway or highways of the Commonwealth, the defendant shall be taken and the proceeding shall be brought either where the offense allegedly occurred, or before the issuing authority for any other magisterial district within the same judicial dis-trict which, in the judgment of the arresting officer, is most convenient to the place of arrest without regard to the boundary line of any magisterial district or judicial district.

   (5)  When any offense is alleged to have occurred within 100 yards of the boundary between two or more magisterial districts of a judicial district, the proceeding may be brought in either or any of the magisterial districts without regard of the boundary lines of any county.

   (6)  When the president judge designates a magisterial district or a location in that district in which certain classes of offenses, which occurred in other specified magisterial districts, may be heard.

 (B)  TRANSFER OF PROCEEDINGS IN COURT CASES

   (1)  Prior to the completion of the preliminary hearing:

     (a)   When charges arising from a single criminal episode, which occurred in more than one judicial district,

       (i)   are filed in more than one judicial district, upon the filing with the issuing authority of a written agreement by the attorneys for the Commonwealth, the proceedings shall be transferred to the magisterial district in the judicial district selected by the attorneys for the Commonwealth; or

       (ii)   are filed in one judicial district, upon the filing of a written agreement by the attorneys for the Commonwealth, the proceedings shall be transferred to the magisterial district in the judicial district selected by the attorneys for the Commonwealth.

     (b)   When charges arising from a single criminal episode, which occurred in more than one magisterial district,

       (i)   are filed in more than one magisterial district, the proceedings may be transferred to the magisterial district selected by the attorney for the Commonwealth; or

       (ii)   are filed in one magisterial district, the proceedings may be transferred to another magisterial district selected by the attorney for the Commonwealth.

   (2)  The issuing authority shall promptly transmit to the issuing authority of the magisterial district to which the proceedings are being transferred a certified copy of all docket entries, together with all the original papers filed in the proceeding, a copy of the bail bond and any deposits in satisfaction of a monetary condition of bail, and a bill of the costs which have accrued but have not been collected prior to the transfer.

   When charges arising from a single criminal episode occur in more than one judicial district, the magisterial district in which the proceeding on all the charges is brought, i.e., the one with venue, may be any one of the magisterial districts in which the charges occurred. See Commonwealth v. Geyer, 687 A.2d 815 (Pa. 1996) (the compulsory joinder rule and 18 Pa.C.S. §  110 apply when two or more summary offenses arise from a single criminal episode).

   Similarly, when charges arising from a single criminal episode occur in more than one magisterial district within one judicial district, the magisterial district in which the proceeding on all the charges is brought, i.e., the one with venue, may be any one of the magisterial districts in which the charges occurred.

   The decision of in which magisterial district in paragraph (A)(2) or in which judicial district in paragraph (A)(3) the proceedings are to be brought is to made initially by the law enforcement officers or attorneys for the Commonwealth. In making the decision, the law enforcement officers or attorneys for the Commonwealth must consider in which magisterial district under paragraph (A)(2) or in which judicial district under paragraph (A)(3) it would be in the interests of justice to have the case proceed, based upon the convenience of the defendant and the witnesses, and the prompt administration of justice.

   Venue is not altered when an issuing authority conducts a proceeding from an advanced communication technology site outside the issuing authority’s magisterial district or judicial district.

   See Rule 134 (Objections to Venue) for the procedures to challenge a transfer of proceedings under this rule.

   See Rule 551 for the procedures to withdraw the prosecution.

   See Chapter 5 Part C concerning bail.

   Official Note

   Formerly Rule 154, adopted January 16, 1970, effective immediately; section (a)(3) adopted July 1, 1970, effective immediately; renumbered Rule 21 September 18, 1973, effective January 1, 1974; amended July 1, 1980, effective August 1, 1980; amended January 28, 1983, effective July 1, 1983; renumbered Rule 130 and amended March 1, 2000, effective April 1, 2001; amended April 20, 2000, effective July 1, 2000; amended September 19, 2000, effective January 1, 2001; amended May 10, 2002, effective September 1, 2002; amended May 21, 2004, effective July 1, 2004.

   Committee Explanatory Reports:

   Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the April 20, 2000 amendments concerning multiple charges arising from a single criminal episode published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 2219 (May 6, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the September 19, 2000 amendments clarifying the application of the rule to both summary and court cases published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 5135 (October 7, 2000).

   Final Report explaining the May 10, 2002 amendments concerning advanced communication technology published with the Court’s Order at 32 Pa.B. (May 25, 2002).

   Final Report explaining the May 21, 2004 changes concerning joinder published with the Court’s Order at 34 Pa.B. 2911 (June 5, 2004).

 (A)  An issuing authority within the magisterial district for which he or she is elected or appointed shall have jurisdiction and authority to receive complaints, issue warrants, hold preliminary arraignments, set and receive bail, issue commitments to jail, and hold hearings and summary trials.

   (1)  Except as provided in paragraph (A)(2), all preliminary arraignments shall be held in the issuing authority’s established office, a night court, or some other facility within the Commonwealth designated by the president judge, or the president judge’s designee.

   (2)  Preliminary arraignments may be conducted using advanced communication technology pursuant to Rule 540. The preliminary arraignment in these cases may be conducted from any site within the Commonwealth designated by the president judge, or the president judge’s designee.

   (3)  All hearings and summary trials before the issuing authority shall be held publicly at the issuing authority’s established office. For reasons of emergency, security, size, or in the interests of justice, the president judge, or the president judge’s designee, may order that a hearing or hearings, or a trial or trials, be held in another more suitable location within the judicial district.

   (4)  The issuing authority may receive complaints, issue warrants, set and receive bail, and issue commitments to jail from any location within the judicial district, or from an advanced communication technology site within the Commonwealth.

 (B)  When local conditions require, the president judge may establish procedures for preliminary hearings or summary trials, in all cases or in certain classes of cases, to be held at a central place or places within the judicial district at certain specified times. The procedures established shall provide either for the transfer of the case or the transfer of the issuing authority to the designated central place as the needs of justice and efficient administration require.

   The 2002 amendments to paragraph (A) divided the paragraph into subparagraphs to more clearly distinguish between the locations for the different types of proceedings and business that an issuing authority conducts.

   Paragraph (A)(3) permits the president judge, or the president judge’s designee, to order that a hearing or hearings be held in a location that is different from the issuing authority’s established office. Nothing in this rule is intended to preclude the president judge, or the president judge’s designee, from issuing a standing order for a change in location. For example, this might be done when a state correctional institution is located in the judicial district and the president judge determines that, for security reasons, all preliminary hearings of the state correctional institution’s inmates will be conducted at that prison.

   See Rule 540 and Comment for the procedures governing the use of advanced communication technology in preliminary arraignments.

   See Rule 130 concerning the venue when proceedings are conducted by using advanced communication technology.

   Paragraph (B) of this rule is intended to facilitate compliance with the requirement that defendants be represented by counsel at the preliminary hearing. Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U. S. 1 (1970).

   Paragraph (A)(4) permits issuing authorities to perform their official dutie