Court Opinion

ID: 9516674
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 23:48:42.363492+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:38:36.001676
License: Public Domain

concurring.
I join in the majority opinion, writing separately only to emphasize that I would not foreclose the possibility that repeated attempts by the Commonwealth to obtain a district justice’s determination that a prima facie case has been presented could be limited. The majority finds that reassessment of a district justice’s conclusion that the Commonwealth has not established its case does not preclude reassessment of that judgment before another by presenting the same or additional evidence. Although the factual circumstances of the instant case do not present the issue, there may be instances in which a defendant may be able to demonstrate that the Commonwealth’s actions in seeking reassessment of its evidence is intended to annoy or harass. Upon such a showing, I would not permit the Commonwealth to present identical evidence before successive district justices because the Commonwealth’s interests are sufficiently protected by the procedure that permits judges of the courts of common pleas to sit as committing magistrates.
*270McDERMOTT, Justice,