Court Opinion

ID: 9695209
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:12:01.241635+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:09.508262
License: Public Domain

TAMILI A, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision and join the dissent by McEwen, J. as I believe it is more persuasive on the issue of retroactivity of a criminal offense. I am further persuaded in this view by the fact that the Supreme Court had an opportunity to review this issue when it considered Commonwealth v. Baysore, 349 Pa.Super. 345, 503 A.2d 33 (1986) and denied allocatur. While I am extremely reluctant to reverse a jury finding under these circumstances where a child has been sexually assaulted over a period of years by an adult, I believe Bay-sore requires it. Fortunately, the amendment of 1985, Tolling of Statute, 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 5554(3), provides the statute will not run as to.a child under 18 years of age where the crime involves injury to the person of the child because of unlawful violence or neglect by the child’s parents, persons responsible for the child’s welfare, individuals residing in the same home as the child or a paramour of the child’s parents. Thus it appears that offenses of this kind, as to children, will not escape prosecution in the future because of the child’s immaturity, fear, or lack of understanding which delays reporting of the offense.