Commonwealth v. Kriston

Once upon a time, a man’s home was his castle, but now, through the advent of electric home confinement, prison authorities have the technology to transform a man’s home into his dungeon.1 While confinement within one’s home is most certainly preferable to incarceration in a jail, I am convinced that home confinement, enhanced by the imposition of stringent restraints on an offender’s liberty, satisfies the definition of “imprisonment” under 75 Pa.C.S.A. § 3731 (Driving under the influence of alcohol or controlled substance).2 Moreover, assuming arguendo that electronic home confinement does…