Case ID: pa_631/html/0298-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

111 A.3d 745
    COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. James Arthur BALL, III, Respondent.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    March 24, 2015.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 24th day of March, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Given the extensive impact the Superior Court’s published opinion could have on the lower courts and prosecution offices in situations where a defendant initiates a statutory summary appeal from a Magisterial District Judge’s sua sponte finding of guilt on an uncharged, lesser-included offense, should this Honorable Court grant review because the purpose for double jeopardy protections are not implicated, or implicated minimally, when the defendant appeals his conviction for a trial de novo?
(2) Should this Honorable Court exercise its supervisory authority over the Superior Court’s erroneous discharge of defendant and remand his case for sentencing on the lesser-included offense he appeals and necessarily was found guilty of committing?