Court Opinion

ID: 9957231
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-03 20:10:55.711624+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:11.519696
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
                              MIDDLE DISTRICT

OMAR ALMUSA, M.D.,                            :   No. 409 MAL 2023
                                              :
                    Petitioner                :
                                              :   Petition for Allowance of Appeal
                                              :   from the Order of the
             v.                               :   Commonwealth Court
                                              :
                                              :
STATE BOARD OF MEDICINE,                      :
                                              :
                    Respondent                :

                                      ORDER

PER CURIAM

      AND NOW, this 3rd day of April, 2024, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

      (1)   Did the Commonwealth Court err when it concluded that
            Sections 40(b) and 43(b) of the Medical Practice Act [of 1985],
            63 P.S. §§ 422.40(b) and 422.43(b), impose a minimum [10]-year
            automatic suspension for a felony drug conviction and do not require
            distinct and separate [State Board of Medicine] actions?

      (2)   Did the Commonwealth Court err when it concluded that granting
            Dr. Almusa a reinstatement hearing would constitute a retroactive
            application of [Section 3113(f) of the Act of July 1, 2020, P.L. 575
            (Act 53), 63 Pa. C.S. § 3113(f)]?

      (3)   Does the rule of lenity support granting Dr. Almusa a reinstatement
            hearing?