Commonwealth v. Kindness
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSpaeth, Judge
I agree with the majority that the appeal must fail. In my view, however, this is so because the rules that provide for the “accelerated rehabilitative disposition” of a criminal case1 are unconstitutional as an improper delegation of judicial power to the district attorney.
*112I History of the Case2
Appellant was arrested and indicted for operating a motor vehicle in Dauphin County under the influence of intoxicating liquor.3 After appellant’s arraignment but before trial, appellant’s attorney asked the district attorney to move that the case be considered for accelerated rehabilitative…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Yick Wo v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. SawyerSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Snowden v. HughesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- A. L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.