Com. v. Pelier, J. (concurring and dissenting statement)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

J-S64019-17 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. JARAY PELIER Appellant : : : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 284 MDA 2017 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence December 19, 2016 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-35-CR-0002461-2015 BEFORE: PANELLA, J., SHOGAN, J., and FITZGERALD,* J. CONCURRING AND DISSENTING STATEMENT BY FITZGERALD, J.: FILED DECEMBER 08, 2017 While I agree with the majority’s disposition of Appellant’s claims, I am of the view that the term “prison,” as used in 18 Pa.C.S. § 5123, does not include a police headquarters. Although a police station may contain temporary detention facilities, it is not a facility for housing persons convicted of crime or awaiting trial. Cf. Commonwealth v. Clark, 761 A.2d 190, 193 (Pa. Super. 2000) (holding that police station is a “detention facility” for the purposes of aggravated harassment by a prisoner). Therefore, I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part. ____________________________________________ * Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court. J-S64019-17 -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.