Com. v. Driscoll (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S72024-12 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. CASEY T. DRISCOLL Appellant No. 756 MDA 2012 Appeal from the Order Entered March 21, 2012 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County Civil Division at No(s): CI-12-01969 BEFORE: MUNDY, J., OTT, J., and STRASSBURGER, J.* MEMORANDUM BY OTT, J. Filed: February 19, 2013 Casey T. Driscoll appeals from the judgment of sentence entered against him following his conviction on ten counts of indirect criminal contempt. The charges arose from an incident in which Driscoll used a friend s cellphone to text his ex-girlfriend contrary to the dictates of a protection from abuse order. Driscoll received an aggregate sentence of three months incarceration (immediately work release eligible) followed by 21 months of probation. Driscoll claims, (1) his sentence of partially consecutive sentences for ten counts of indirect criminal contempt violates the prohibition against double jeopardy, and (2) there was insufficient evidence to convict him of the tenth count. After a thorough review of the ____________________________________________ * Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. J-S72024-12 official record, submissions by the parties, and relevant law, we affirm on the basis of the comprehensive Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinion authored by the Honorable Donald R. Totaro. Briefly, the charges in this matter arose from an incident on February 26, 2012, in which Driscoll used the phone of his friend, Dan Barr, to send multiple text messages to his ex-girlfriend, Rebecca Parker, who had previously obtained a temporary protection from abuse order against Driscoll.1 That order specifically forbade Driscoll from any contact with Parker, including written or telephonic communication. Barr was a mutual friend of Driscoll and Parker, and Parker would accept text messages from Barr s phone. Pretending to be Barr, Driscoll asked Parker to give him a second chance. Driscoll later admitted to Barr that he sent the text messages. The trial court has comprehensively addressed the claims raised by Driscoll in the appeal in its June 12, 2012 Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) opinon. Therefore, we rely upon the reasoning of that opinion in denying Driscoll relief. The parties are directed to attach a copy of the June 12, 2012 trial court opinion in the event of further proceedings. Judgment of sentence affirmed. ____________________________________________ 1 Driscoll and Barr had been drinking and Barr became intoxicated. Driscoll used Barr s phone after Barr fell asleep. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
