Official newsletter of the
Pennsylvania Judicial System

Issue 4, 2021

In this issue

Read about the new Case Research Collection 
launched by the Pa. Disciplinary Board, the upcoming 
re-establishment process, a department spotlight on 
Legislative Affairs and more.

1

D E PA R T M E N T   S P OT L I G H T: 

Legislative 
Affairs

AOPC’s Office of Legislative Affairs 
represents the AOPC before the 
state’s executive and legislative 
branches of government. The 
office partners with the Legislative 
Committee of the Pennsylvania 
Conference of State Trial Judges – a 
robust group of commissioned and 
senior common pleas judges from 
rural, suburban and urban judicial 
districts. The committee is chaired by 
Craig Dally, a former member 
Judge Craig Dally
of the House of Representatives from 
Northampton County. 

The department is made up of Director 
of Legislative Affairs Josh Wilson
Assistant Director of Legislative Affairs 
Damian Wachter.
Damian Wachter

Josh Wilson and 

Together, they monitor and report 
on the progress of legislation in the 
General Assembly and comment on 
the effect bills will have on the fiscal 
and administrative operations of the 
judicial system. Seven months into 
the legislative session, staff and the 
committee are watching nearly 600 
bills.

The department’s schedule, focus 
and workload are almost entirely 
based on the legislative calendar 
– meeting directly with leadership, 
chairmen, rank and file legislators 
and their staffs on issues of interest. 

Pertinent legislative committees 
include Judiciary, Aging and Older 
Adult Services, Children and Youth, 
Appropriations and Transportation. 
The ever-expanding list of statutes 
of interest include the Judicial 
Code, Domestic Relations Code, 
Administrative and Fiscal Codes, 
Crimes Code, Vehicle Code, Landlord 
and Tenant Act and Commission on 
Crime and Delinquency Law. 

As a result of this collaboration with 
our government partners, proposed 
legislation receives crucial input from 
the AOPC regarding the effects it 
may have on relevant courts or the 
programs supporting those courts, 
as well as on Pennsylvania’s judicial 
system as a whole. 

Feedback and participation 
by members of the Legislative 
Committee is critical to providing 
the perspective of jurists who have 
acquired knowledge and expertise 
on a myriad of issues in the course 
of their judicial duties. Several 
members of the committee – a 
number whom are former members 
of the General Assembly – have 
provided input to House and Senate 
committees, individual members, 
legislative leadership and staff on 
legislation involving issues of interest 
including mandatory minimum 
sentences, probation reform, custody, 
dependency and protection from 
abuse.

Positions on legislation are never 
taken or provided – rather critical 
feedback and potential points of 
concern within bills are always 
communicated and at times, 

(l) Damian Wachter and (r) Josh Wilson

amendatory ideas meant to clarify or 
improve legislation are provided for 
consideration.

The Legislative Committee is also 
crucial to ensuring that the spirit of 
the O’Brien Memorandum – that all 
approaches to the Legislature be 
coordinated and channeled through 
the Supreme Court or the AOPC 
– is adhered to. Any jurist with a 
legislative issue is encouraged to 
work with Judge Dally, the Legislative 
Committee and AOPC/Legislative 
Affairs. 

In addition to coordinating all 
interaction with the legislature, AOPC/
Legislative Affairs staff also provides 
vital legislative support to all areas 
of the judiciary including all levels of 
court, boards, advisory committees 
and departments of the AOPC.

Members of the Legislative Committee meeting at the Pennsylvania Conference of State Trial Judges in July 2021. 

2

Legislative roundup by Damian J. Wachter, Esq.

The legislature wrapped up the budget at the end of June. The chambers will return to session 
The legislature wrapped up the budget at the end of June. The chambers will return to session 
in September and the House and Senate are scheduled for 18 voting session days this fall.
in September and the House and Senate are scheduled for 18 voting session days this fall.

Budget   
Budget   

The 2021-22 judicial budget was flat funded by Act 
1A of 2021, except for an increase and supplemental 
appropriation for the Court of Judicial Discipline. The 
judiciary sought a modest 5.7 percent increase.  

Two other budget-related requests were statutory in nature 
– one addressing the annual $15 million diversion from 
the Judicial Computer System (JCS) account, the second 
reauthorizing critical “Act 49” surcharges that provide for 
a significant portion of the judiciary’s general operations 
budget.  

Act 24 of 2021 suspended the annual diversion of $15 
million for the 2021-22 fiscal year.  In tandem with the 
suspension, Act 70 of 2021 created the JCS Financial Audit 
Committee within the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime 
and Delinquency (PCCD). The committee is comprised of 
seven voting and six non-voting advisory members. The 
voting members include members of legislative leadership 
or designees and a common pleas judge. The non-voting 
advisory members are users of the system – including 
the state court administrator, executive entities (including 
PCCD, Department of Corrections and Pennsylvania 
State Police) and the presidents of County Commissioners 
Association of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania State 
Association of the Prothonotaries and Clerks of Courts.  

The committee will review the policy goals, purpose and 
programs of the JCS, assess the annual financial needs 
and revenue streams that support the continuous and 

uninterrupted operation of the system and submit a report 
to the Appropriations and Judiciary Committees.  

Reauthorization of the Act 49 surcharges was not part 
of the budget and will require action in the fall. Without 
legislative reauthorization, the surcharges will expire on 
Dec. 31.

Failure to appear for payment determination 
Failure to appear for payment determination 
hearing and collection agencies
hearing and collection agencies

Senate Bill 516 sought to allow issuing authorities to turn 
delinquent accounts over to private collection agencies 
or county collection enforcement units when defendants 
fail to appear for a scheduled and noticed financial 
determination hearing. The bill passed the Senate 34-15 
and the House 109-92, but was vetoed by the governor.  

Compulsory Joinder Statute and Perfetto
Compulsory Joinder Statute and Perfetto

Senate Bill 588 addresses the decision in Commonwealth 
v. Perfetto, 652 Pa. 101 (2019), clarifying that prosecution 
is not barred for offenses based on the same conduct or 
arising from the same criminal episode if the offense for 
which the defendant was formerly convicted or acquitted 
was a summary offense or a summary traffic offense. The 
bill passed the Senate 46-4 and was referred to the House 
Judiciary Committee.   

Judicial ethical rules
Judicial ethical rules

House Resolution 114 urges the Pennsylvania Supreme 
Court to modify or adopt rules to require the posting of 

3

statements of financial interest on a publicly accessible 
website; codify more restrictive policies on the reporting 
gifts, transportation, lodging and hospitality; impose a 
one-year prohibition on attorneys leaving government 
service and lobbying the governmental body with which 
the attorney had been associated; and end the practice of 
judges and justices receiving honoraria.  

The resolution includes a general request that the 
Court conduct a full examination of ethical and financial 
reporting requirements for jurists and staff to determine 
whether additional amendments would promote greater 
transparency and avoid impropriety and the appearance 
thereof. The resolution was referred to House State 
Government and re-referred to the Subcommittee on 
Campaign Finance and Elections.

Kayden’s Law and custody
Kayden’s Law and custody

Constitutional amendment – advertising entity 
Constitutional amendment – advertising entity 

House Bill 1010 would amend the constitution to replace 
the Secretary of the Commonwealth with the Legislative 
Reference Bureau (LRB) or a successor legislative agency 
as the entity responsible for publishing constitutional 
amendments. The bill also requires that the second 
publication of proposed amendments include only the 
language of the amendment, the ballot question to be 
used and a summary of the amendment as prepared by 
the LRB or successor agency. The legislation passed the 
House 113-88 and is pending on the Senate floor. If the 
Senate passes the bill, it will have to be considered and 
passed again in the 2023-24 legislative session before it 
can appear on the ballot. 

Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) 2 and  
Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI) 2 and  
Crime Victims Act
Crime Victims Act

Senate Bill 78 would establish Kayden’s Law, bringing 
comprehensive changes to the custody statute focusing on 
the health and safety of the child. 

The most important part of the bill codifies that no 
single custody factor can by itself be determinative in 
awarding custody. Courts must examine the totality of 
the circumstances, giving weighted consideration to the 
factors that impact the health and safety of the child, when 
issuing a custody order that is in the best interest of the 
child. Also, criminal convictions cannot by themselves be 
determinative in the awarding of custody. 

Finally, the AOPC may develop and implement an ongoing 
education and training program for judges, MDJs and 
relevant court personnel, including guardians ad litem, 
counsel for children, masters and mediators regarding 
child abuse. The education and training program must 
include all aspects of the maltreatment of children, 
including sexual and physical abuse, implicit and explicit 
bias, trauma and neglect and the impact of child abuse 
and domestic violence on children. It must also include 
the latest best practices from evidence-based and peer-
reviewed research by recognized experts in the specific 
types of abuse.  

The legislation passed the Senate 46-4 and was referred 
to the House Judiciary Committee. 

Senate Bill 708 is the remaining bill in the JRI 2 package. 
The legislation makes comprehensive changes to 
victim rights and compensation, includes updates and 
modifications to definitions and adds responsibilities for 
victims, law enforcement and prosecutors.  

The bill repeals the current law governing the Crime 
Victims Compensation and Victim Witness Services 
Fund, establishing in their place a single Crime Victim 
Services and Compensation Fund, for use by the Office of 
Victim Services for payments to claimants, victim-witness 
services and technical assistance. Costs imposed under 
current law remain the same and will be paid into the fund, 
except that 70 percent of any costs exceeding $60 is paid 
into local victim service funds administered by counties.  

The bill eliminates the 50 percent share of the minimum 
$25 supervision fee assessed against offenders that is 
currently deposited into the State Offender Supervision 
Fund. Rather, all funds will go to county supervision fee 
restricted receipts accounts.  

Finally, the legislation directs the County Adult Probation 
and Parole Advisory Committee to advise PCCD on 
the promulgation of regulations providing for offender 
supervision programs. Senate Bill 708 passed the Senate 
50-0 and has been referred to the House Judiciary 
Committee.    

Expert witnesses and tender years exception 
Expert witnesses and tender years exception 

Elder abuse
Elder abuse

Senate Bill 81 was enacted as Act 52 of 2021 to expand the 
scope of offenses for which it is allowable to call expert 
witnesses to testify to the understanding of the dynamics 
of sexual violence to include human trafficking and crimes 
of domestic violence. For the purposes of the act, domestic 
violence offenses include simple assault, aggravated 
assault, stalking or strangulation perpetrated against a 
family or household member as defined 23 Pa.C.S. § 6102.

House Bill 156 was enacted as Act 29 of 2021 to increase 
the age of a child victim or witness to which the tender 
years exception applies from 12 to 16 years or younger. 

Acts 48 and 49 of 2021 are two measures of a four-bill 
(House Bills 1428-1431) elder abuse package. Act 48 
creates a new criminal offense – financial exploitation 
of an older adult or care-dependent person – for the 
wrongful or unauthorized taking (or attempt to take) assets 
or property of an older adult or care-dependent person. 
Violations are generally first degree misdemeanors, with 
felony grading available for offenses involving higher 
dollar amounts.

Act 49 criminalizes the posting of any audio, video or still 
image of care-dependent persons on social media and 

4

other platforms with intent to ridicule or demean. The 
act grades the offense as a third-degree misdemeanor. 
The Advisory Council on Elder Justice in the Courts was 
involved in calling attention to this issue and assisted in 
developing Act 49. 

{Damian Wachter, Esq. is the assistant director 
of Legislative Affairs.}

Pa. Disciplinary Board launches Case Research Collection 

Over the past few years, Pa. 
Disciplinary Board staff have worked 
with web developers to design and 
build an online database of their 
concluded proceedings. 

The Case Research Collection was 
released to the public on July 1 and 
currently consists of all Disciplinary 
Board cases that have concluded 
from Jan. 2016 through the present. 

While the site was originally planned 
as a tool for attorneys to conduct 
research, it became clear that 
there might be public interest in the 
collection and that it could be a great 
educational resource for law students.

Case entries in the collection provide 
a basic set of information including 
keywords, rule violations and 
dispositions. 

For matters resulting in reinstatement 
or public discipline, additional 
details identifying the petitioner or 
respondent are available. Some 
entries also offer links to varying 
public documents if available – such 
as a Board or Court Order/Opinion, 
Board report, joint petition for 
discipline or resignation statement. 

For any matter resulting in an informal 
admonition or private reprimand, a 
summary of discipline is provided, 
although all documents and 
identifying information remain entirely 
confidential.

The collection can be accessed 
from the new “cases” tab on the 
Disciplinary Board website, where 
users can also study rule sets, 
view pending case information and 
learn more about the discipline and 
reinstatement processes. 

Users can search for case entries 
based on a variety of criteria including 
disposition, relevant rules, disciplinary 
counsel, keywords etc. 

since, to preserve confidentiality, 
users are not able to ascertain private 
discipline via county or attorney 
information. 

When searching by keywords, users 
can choose keyword phrases from the 
dropdown menu that are relevant to 
a specific case entry. Some examples 
include excessive fees, mail fraud or 
restitution. 

Searching by keyword proves 
particularly helpful when seeking a 
case resulting in private discipline 

A list of searchable keywords is 
included in the user manual and a 
video tutorial is also available online 
as further guidance.

Hopeful that this will prove to be a 
useful resource to both attorneys and 
non-attorneys alike, the Disciplinary 
Board will continue to update the 
collection as future cases conclude. 

5

New statewide tool allows for more current 
monitoring and evaluating caseloads

By AOPC Research and Statistics Director Kim Nieves, and Assistant Director Laurie Sacerdote

The pandemic and judicial emergency 
required courts to find new ways to 
conduct business. Interruption of 
normal court operations, statewide 
shut downs and stay-at-home orders 
changed the normal flow of cases 
through the courts. 

The Caseload Highlights of 
the Unified Judicial System of 
Pennsylvania report was created 
to provide court leadership with a 
means of tracking these changes in 
real time. The report shows the pace 
of incoming cases alongside the pace 
of outgoing cases. Together these 
measures can alert court managers to 
potential for backlogs, and highlight 
where resources need to be targeted. 

To deliver this report to districts 
monthly, rapid changes in business 
processes were needed. In 
Pennsylvania, Appellate, Common 
Pleas and Limited Jurisdictions data 
come from many different sources and 
case management systems. 

All of these sources – including 
judicial district personnel, multiple 
AOPC departments and outside 
agencies – coordinated to increase 
the frequency of data reporting to 
meet the demand for current caseflow 
information. 

The result is a comprehensive 
Caseload Highlights report that has 
grown in scope and detail with each 
issue over the past year. In addition to 
the inclusion of more case types and 
courts, it has also been transformed 
into a web-based, interactive 
dashboard that can be more easily 
shared, increasing the scope of its 
distribution. 

Moving forward, the Caseload 
Highlights Report will continue to 
serve as a statewide tool for counties 
to monitor and evaluate caseloads. 
The courts will soon see the 
expiration of many administrative and 

Example: Court of Common Pleas Criminal filings

executive orders, including the 
eviction moratorium. It is assumed 
that the expiration of the moratorium 
will have a direct impact on the 
Magisterial District and Philadelphia 
Municipal Courts.

To address an anticipated increase 
in filings, a separate Landlord-Tenant 
dashboard will provide regular 
updates to the movement of these 
cases through the limited jurisdiction 
courts. 

In addition, analysis of the post-
pandemic cases will be of particular 
interest, as courts manage the 
caseflow’s return to pre-pandemic 

levels, and observe the effects of 
court business innovations on timely 
case processing. 

In terms of lessons learned, the 
unexpected push to accelerate the 
reporting schedule and provide more 
timely data that could be applied to 
urgent needs resulted in a permanent 
tool that policy makers, judges and 
court administration can use to 
evaluate and manage courts. 

moreinformation

If you would like more information, 
please email the Research Department 
at statistics@pacourts.us. 

6

NCSC CREATES COURSES 
FOR TREATMENT COURT 
PROFESSIONALS

The nation’s opioid crisis highlighted a persistent 
challenge for state courts: what to do with the massive 
number of non-violent drug offenders who find themselves 
in court. It also highlighted the need to provide additional 
training for those who work in the nation’s treatment 
courts.

NCSC’s Institute for Court Management (ICM) has been 
working for a year and a half to create online courses 
to train judges, administrators and others who work in 
treatment courts.

“Treatment courts are a specialty court that doesn’t 
operate like a traditional criminal or civil court,” said 
Derek Felton, ICM’s director of Creative Learning Services. 
“People working in treatment courts need foundational 
knowledge to help them better understand the mission of 
treatment courts and the participants they will be working 
with.”

The work, done on behalf of the National Association of 
Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) and funded by the 
U.S. Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Assistance, 
has involved creating interactive courses that focus on 10 
areas:

Psychopharmacology
• 
•  Assessment and Treatment
•  Co-Occurring Disorders
• 
•  Drug Testing
•  Recurrence
•  Confidentiality and Ethics

PTSD

•  Mentors in Veterans Courts
• 
•  Military Culture

Introduction to the Department of Veterans Affairs

These courses are replacing a course ICM developed 
for NADCP in 2008 as well as several webinars used by 
the association, a training and advocacy organization for 
the treatment court model, which includes about 4,000 
programs in every state, four territories and more than 20 
countries.

“We want to empower every person working in treatment 
courts to continue to expand their knowledge and deepen 
their understanding of core principles and practices,” said 
NADCP Chief of Training and Research, Carolyn Hardin. 

The new courses feature self-paced content modules that 
present the most up-to-date science and best practices in 
the treatment court field. The modules employ interactive 
exercises, animation and audio voice over to guide 
participants through the training.

Felton, who oversaw the creation of the courses, said 
ICM is also creating courses that cover seven of NADCP’s 
10 Adult Drug Court Best Practice Standards. ICM also 
recently signed a new contract with NADCP to develop 
four courses to help treatment court law enforcement 
officers.

*This excerpt was reprinted with permission from 
the National Center of State Courts June newsletter 
– @the Center. 

Narcan® in 
county courts 

Partnering with the Pa. Sheriffs’ 
Association, Pa. Commission on 
Crime and Delinquency (PCCD) and 
the Pa. Department of Drug and 
Alcohol Programs, the Pa. Courts are 
working to increase the availability of 
the life-saving medication, naloxone 
(Narcan®), at county court facilities 
statewide. 

According to the Center for Disease 
Control and Prevention, Pennsylvania 
has the fifth highest overdose death 

rate in the country. By making 
naloxone available in county court 
facilities, the courts will be better 
equipped to assist those experiencing 
an overdose-related emergency while 
in a court facility. 

Any county court may request 
naloxone doses for use within their 
court facilities, including magisterial 
district court offices. 

The new initiative is part of PCCD’s 
Naloxone for First Responders 
Program, which is aimed at providing 
outreach, assistance and training on 
the use of naloxone. 

This program, launched in Nov. 2017, 
provides Narcan® to groups through a 
network of Centralized Coordinating 
Entities – who have distributed more 
than 80,000 kits to first responder 
groups, resulting in more than 17,000 
reported overdose reversals to date.

Counties interested in participating 
in this program should contact Tom 
Maioli, executive director of the Pa. 
Sheriffs’ Association at tmaioli@
pasheriffs.org. 

7

Animal abuse data in Pennsylvania – 
nearly four years since 
Libre’s Law took effect

info

P A C O U R T S

What is Libre’s Law?

Total number of offenses filed = 25,228

54%(13,520 offenses) of animal

abuse offenses were filed
for neglect of an animal

Cruelty to
an animal
(9,771 offenses)

39%

7%

Aggravated cruelty
to an animal
(1,937 offenses)

Animal abuse offenses filed since 
Libre’s Law was enacted:

11,851

8,478

3,934

2017

2018

2019

2020

Animal abuse offenses refer to Title 18 – 
Sections 5532, 5533 and 5534

38%
female

9%
unreported

26-35

                                   24%

36-45

                           20%

46-65

                                     25%

66 and over

      6%

Unreported

            9%

965

Total # of defendants = 3,271

Top 10 counties with the highest number of animal abuse cases:

3%

Delaware

So m erset
3%

Montgomery

3%

Luzerne

5%

Bucks

Allegheny

15%

3%

Fayette

3%

York

3% 3%
Westmoreland

Total # of cases filed = 6,210

Lackawanna

3%

Gender of defendants:

Age of defendants:

53% of defendants

in animal abuse
cases are male  

Under 18

2%

19-25

                    14%

Libre’s Law is an anti-cruelty law that strengthened 
protection for animals and increased penalties 
for animal abuse in Pennsylvania - including the 
ability for aggravated animal cruelty to be 
charged as a felony.  

The law, inspired by a Boston Terrier puppy who 
was found badly neglected and abused in
Lancaster County, went into effect Aug. 28, 2017.

**All data refers to cases and offenses filed from 8/27/2017- 12/31/2020 for Title 18- Sections 5532 (Neglect of animal), 
5533 (Cruelty to animal) and 5534 (Aggravated cruelty to animal) as recorded in the Magisterial District Judge 
System (MDJS) and Common Pleas Case Management System (CPCMS).

Beware of phishing emails 

IT security reminders
IT security reminders

Phishing is not a new phenomenon – it has been the most 
common attack vector for cybercriminals for a number of 
years – but, due to the increasing complexity of phishing 
scams, knowing how to spot a phishing email is becoming 
more important than ever before.

Cybercriminals may use social-engineering techniques 
to make their email look genuine and include a request 
to click on a link, open an attachment or provide other 
sensitive information such as login credentials. If the 
recipient clicks on a link to a malware-infected website, 
opens an attachment with a malicious payload or divulges 
their login credentials, an attacker can access a corporate 
network undetected.

How to spot a phishing email 
How to spot a phishing email 

1. Emails Demanding Urgent Action
1. Emails Demanding Urgent Action

Emails threatening a negative consequence, or a loss 
of opportunity unless urgent action is taken, are often 
phishing emails. Attackers often use this approach to rush 
recipients into action before they have had the opportunity 
to study the email for potential flaws or inconsistencies.

2. Emails with Bad Grammar and Spelling Mistakes
2. Emails with Bad Grammar and Spelling Mistakes

Another way to spot phishing is bad grammar and spelling 
mistakes. Many companies apply spell-checking tools 
to outgoing emails by default to ensure their emails are 
grammatically correct. 

3. Emails with an Unfamiliar Greeting or Salutation
3. Emails with an Unfamiliar Greeting or Salutation

Emails exchanged between work colleagues usually have 
an informal salutation. Those that start “Dear,” or contain 
phrases not normally used in informal conversation, are 
from sources unfamiliar with the style of office interaction 
used in your business and should arouse suspicion.

4. Inconsistencies in Email Addresses, Links and Domain 
4. Inconsistencies in Email Addresses, Links and Domain 
Names
Names

Another way how to spot phishing is by finding 
inconsistencies in email addresses, links and domain 
names. Does the email originate from an organization 
corresponded with often? If so, check the sender’s address 
against previous emails from the same organization. Look 

to see if a link is legitimate by hovering the mouse pointer 
over the link to see what pops up. 

5. Suspicious Attachments
5. Suspicious Attachments

Emails with attachments should always be treated 
suspiciously – especially if they have an unfamiliar 
extension or one commonly associated with malware (.zip, 
.exe, .scr, etc.).

6. Emails Requesting Login Credentials, Payment 
6. Emails Requesting Login Credentials, Payment 
Information or Sensitive Data
Information or Sensitive Data

Emails originating from an unexpected or unfamiliar 
sender that request login credentials, payment information 
or other sensitive data should always be treated with 
caution. Since cybercriminals can forge login pages to 
look similar to the real thing, whenever a recipient is 
redirected to a login page or told a payment is due, they 
should refrain from inputting information unless they are 
100 percent certain the email is legitimate.

W I N N E R !
ACT NOW!

L I C
E
H

K  
E

C

R

7. Too Good to Be True Emails
7. Too Good to Be True Emails

Too good to be true emails are those which incentivize 
the recipient to click on a link or open an attachment 
by claiming there will be a reward of some nature. If the 
sender of the email is unfamiliar or the recipient did not 
initiate the contact, it’s likely this is a phishing email.

Reminder: AOPC employees with questions or concerns 
Reminder: 
about the legitimacy of an email should send the email as 
an attachment to ITSecurity@pacourts.us.

*This is an excerpt from the July 2021 issue of the AOPC/IT Security newsletter. 

9

Medical marijuana: 
implications for 
Pennsylvania’s Courts

Faculty at a recent Judicial Education Department course examined 
the challenging legal issues judges must navigate since Pennsylvania’s 
legislature enacted the Medical Marijuana Act (MMA) in May 2016. 

Dr. Carrie Hempel-Sanderoff began the discussion by reviewing current 
research trends into cannabis and its physiological effects, and by 
highlighting studies that help inform a judge’s decision making when 
one or more party before them is licensed by the Commonwealth to use 
medical marijuana. 

The second part of the course focused on cannabis-related legal issues 
judges face, issues that are made more complex by the significant discord 
between state and federal law. 

Judges face unique challenges when determining the role cannabis use 
plays in individual cases before them, and how best to respond when a 
party is licensed to use, but is also appearing before the Court. 

Faculty explained that a judge’s ability to discern medical from 
recreational use, while challenging, can be guided by examining several 
factors, including: the party’s reason for using medical marijuana; the 
setting in which they use marijuana, as well as their dosing and use 
patterns; and, importantly, their relationship with a medical professional. 

When evaluating a party’s medical marijuana use, judges should consider 
various indicators, including whether or not there is an active partnership 
between the patient and the medical provider, including regular follow-up 
and monitoring. 

Under these circumstances, patients should present little or no evidence 
of impairment or intoxication and tend to gravitate toward lower THC and 
higher CBD formulas. 

Comparatively, individuals using marijuana recreationally may or may not 
have medical cards, but typically are unmonitored and unguided in their 
use. The recreational user’s goal is intoxication, rather than relief from 
symptoms. These individuals are more likely to seek out products that 
have higher THC potency. 

Judges face challenging decisions when a party before them is licensed 
to use medical marijuana. In addition to the differentiating between an 
individual using marijuana recreationally rather than medically, they 
must make decisions with scant evidence-based treatment or dosing 
guidelines, and a lack of consensus among legal systems on definitions of 
intoxication, impairment and penalties. 

10

Editors
Stacey Witalec
Kim Bathgate

Writer
Casey Scheffler

Contributors
Patti Campbell
Rhonda Hocker
Stephen Baldwin

Graphic Design
Gretchen Smith

Photography
Justin Scott

Court Administrator of PA
Geoff Moulton

Deputy Court Administrator of PA
Andrea B. Tuominen

All content is collected, written 
and edited by the AOPC 
Communications Office 
unless noted. 
You may reach the office 
by calling: (717) 231-3300 
or by emailing: 
CommunicationsOffice@pacourts.us

For more information about 
Pennsylvania’s courts, visit: 
www.pacourts.us

Twitter @PACourts
Facebook @PACourts
YouTube @PACourts
Instagram @pennsylvaniacourts

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Max Baer
Chief Justice of Pennsylvania

Thomas G. Saylor
Justice 

Debra Todd
Justice

Christine Donohue
Justice

Kevin M. Dougherty
Justice

David N. Wecht
Justice

Sallie Updyke Mundy
Justice

(l to r) Matthew Wood - Clinical Director, Mark Longenberger – Director of Support Services, Matthew Salvatori – CYS Administrator, 
Judge Ryan Tira, Judge Joy Reynolds McCoy, Ronald James – Foster Parent, President Judge Nancy Butts, Heather Wood – 
Specialized Services Supervisor, Barbie Barnes – Resource Care Coordinator, Sara McCombie – Assessment Caseworker, Sam Group 
– Ongoing Caseworker 

Lycoming County Court honors CYS 

At the end of June, the five judges of the Lycoming County 
Court of Common Pleas held a ceremony honoring and 
recognizing the Children and Youth Services Agency (CYS) 
employees for their dedication and commitment to the 
children in their county. 

In her remarks, Judge McCoy highlighted the county’s 
successful efforts to reduce the number of children in 
congregate care to zero, while increasing the number of 
children placed in kinship care from 17 percent in 2019 to 
45 percent today. 

Joy Reynolds McCoy, along with 

Judges Ryan Tira
Ryan Tira and Joy Reynolds McCoy
Lycoming County CYS Administrator Matt Salvatori, 
presented the agency with an official proclamation and 
thanked CYS staff for consistently going above and beyond 
to meet the needs of children and families, especially 
during the pandemic. 

“As a bench, we decided to recognize the court offices 
that work under us and the agencies that we work closely 
with for all of the work that these individuals do for our 
community,” Judge McCoy said.

Judge McCoy praised the achievements of CYS and 
acknowledged the proactive and forward-thinking nature 
of their team that has been recognized across the state. 

“When I agreed to oversee the Family Court Division, I had 
no idea what I had said yes to, but looking back it has been 
incredibly fulfilling and rewarding,” Judge McCoy said. 

She also spoke about the agency’s focus on the 
recruitment of new foster homes and training of all foster 
parents in Trust Based Relational Intervention (TBRI), 
pointing to the county’s increase from 44 foster homes in 
2019 to their current number of 58. 

As part of the ceremony, CYS specifically recognized Ron 
and Brenda James who have served as foster parents for 
over 25 years – caring for over 40 children during that time 
and routinely taking in teenage boys who were hard to 
place.

Attending the ceremony were various CYS employees, 
caseworkers and advisory staff, along with all three county 
commissioners, the county director and Office of Children 
Sandy Moore. 
and Families in the Courts Director Sandy Moore

11

Mercer County Veterans 
Court Graduation 

At the end of June, nineteen veterans graduated from Mercer County 
Veterans Treatment Court (VTC) – where Pa. Supreme Court Justice 
Debra Todd
Daniel 
Debra Todd and Mercer County Common Pleas Judge Daniel 
Wallace presided over the ceremony.
Wallace

Mercer County Judge Daniel Wallace (l) and  
Pa. Supreme Court Justice Debra Todd (r) 

Pa. Supreme Court Boards enhance pro bono efforts

In a collaboration with the Pa. 
Continuing Legal Education (CLE) 
Board and the Interest on Lawyers’ 
Trust Account (IOLTA) Board, the Pa. 
Disciplinary Board has created a 
webpage to connect Pa. attorneys 
with available resources to perform 
pro bono services. 

The webpage houses easily-
accessible information about each 
of the Board’s pro bono programs 
and opportunities – including links to 
applicable forms, participating legal-
aid organizations and accredited 
providers, FAQs about emeritus status, 
etc. 

The overall effort to blend legal 
education initiatives with much-

needed assistance for legal service 
programs first accelerated in 2018 
when the Pa. Supreme Court created 
an emeritus status for attorneys who 
retire from the practice of law and 
seek to provide pro bono services to 
legal aid organizations. 

The following year in 2019, the Court 
approved a pilot project for the CLE 
Board to allow attorneys to receive 
one CLE credit for every five hours of 
pro bono service completed through 
accredited providers. 

Renewing the Court’s support for 
these civil legal aid programs, Pa. 
Supreme Court Chief Justice Max Baer
Max Baer 
encouraged the more than 75,000 
attorneys across the state to help in 

the mission to advance equal access 
to justice for all Pennsylvanians by 
donating their time and legal skills. 

“This year, the need is especially 
acute. The global pandemic has 
disproportionately impacted low-
income groups, and the resulting 
financial and familial stressors are 
exacerbating the need for civil legal 
aid among those who cannot afford 
private counsel,” Chief Justice Baer 
wrote. 

The new Pro Bono webpage can be 
accessed from the “For Attorneys” tab 
on the Disciplinary Board website. 

FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT PENNSYLVANIA’S COURTS, VISIT: 

www.pacourts.us

Facebook 
@PACourts

YouTube 
@PACourts

Twitter 
@PACourts

Instagram 
@pennsylvaniacourts

12

Pa. Supreme Court to re-establish 
magisterial districts – updating numbers 
and boundaries for the next 10 years

•  Workload calculations for each of 

the magisterial districts
•  Magisterial district judge 

term expiration, birthdate and 
mandatory retirement date
Past re-establishment orders and 
proposals for judicial districts.

• 

Since population is not a driving factor 
in re-establishment, these resources 
can be used to begin the process, 
and later in September, each judicial 
district can add the numbers from the 
U.S. Census as a guide for identifying 
trends in population increases or 
decreases. 

required administrative and non-
case related activities that impact 
workload, but are not captured by 
statistics. 

By early 2022, each president judge 
will submit a draft re-establishment 
plan to the AOPC for review.

The guiding principle for re-
establishment is for each president 
judge to determine if they have the 
proper number of MDJs needed to 
handle the caseload in their judicial 
district. 

While July 2021 was marked by 
Independence Day and the dog days 
of summer, it also marked the start of 
the much anticipated process called 
re-establishment – also referred to as 
realignment or redistricting.

According to statute, re-establishment 
is the process by which president 
judges review the number and 
boundaries of the magisterial districts 
within each of the Commonwealth’s 
59 judicial districts. It takes place 
following the official reporting of the 
decennial U.S. census. Only the First 
Judicial District (Philadelphia), which 
has no magisterial 
district judges (MDJs), 
does not participate.

This comprehensive and 
demanding analysis 
helps ensure the 
effective administration 
of justice throughout 
the Commonwealth, 
and that the current 
configuration of each 
magisterial district is 
designed to serve its 
residents over the next 
decade. 

Historically, many 
proposals have 
recommended 
maintaining the status 
quo, others have 
recommended the 
shifting of boundaries 
to more equitably 
distribute the workload 
among the judges in 
a county. Likewise, 
others have eliminated 
one or more districts in 
their county or, where 
necessary, add a 
district.

While federal law requires that local 
census data be reported to the states 
no later than April 1, 2021, the Census 
Bureau will not be able to certify the 
local census figures until September 
2021. The AOPC will forward this 
information to president judges 
once it’s finalized in September. In 
the meantime, each judicial district 
has been provided with a variety of 
resources, including:

•  Detailed instructions on how to 

navigate the process

•  Case filing statistics by case type 
for a six year period (2014 – 2019) 
for each magisterial district within 
judicial districts 

Caseload data provides a multitude 
of insights into the magisterial district 
court system because it is case 
filings, and not population, that truly 
demonstrate the workload. Case 
filings for all case types, except for 
miscellaneous dockets, were provided 
for 6 years, along with averages 
for those six years, and averages 
by county class were provided to 
illustrate trends. 

To assist judicial districts in 
differentiating among the impact 
of the various case types, case 
weights for each docket type were 
also included. Not all case types are 
equally complex and time consuming. 
The case weights also account for 

13

It’s important to note that proposals 
can become effective immediately, 
or in the future, when a sitting judge’s 
term expires or he or she reaches 
mandatory retirement age. 

Proposals will be made available 
for public comment prior to the final 
submission to the Supreme Court at 
www.pacourts.us. 

The AOPC anticipates that the 
process will be complete by the end 
of 2022 although approved changes 
might not take effect for a few years 
if terms are ending or mandatory 
retirements are within a few years. 

Dependency courts in the family engagement initiative focus 
efforts on implicit bias and the urgency of awareness 

Earlier this year, The Office of Children 
and Families in the Courts held the 
largest virtual-education event ever 
hosted by the AOPC with more than 
800 participants from Pennsylvania 
dependency courts and child welfare 
agencies, who are part of the State 
Roundtable’s Family Engagement 
Initiative (FEI). 

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice 
Kevin Dougherty
Kevin Dougherty opened the session 
and encouraged participants to be 
very intentional in examining beliefs 
and biases.

Justice Dougherty said, “What we 
believe impacts how we behave and 
when we self-reform, we judicially 
reform.”

“The Urgency of Awareness: 
Unlocking The Power within 
Individual, Organizational and 
Community Efforts,” was presented by 
national expert and author Jodi Pfarr. 

Since 2001, Pfarr has conducted 
seminars with police departments, 
judges, teachers, religious institutions, 
social service workers and fire 
departments. She is the author 
of Tactical Communication: Law 
enforcement tools for successful 
encounters with people from poverty, 
middle class and wealth.

The session focused on gaining a 
deeper awareness of the various 
societal categorizations placed upon 
us such as: 

•  married or non-married
• 

formally educated or informally 
educated 

•  white or of color 
•  working poor/impoverished or 

middle/upper class

Pfarr emphasized that “there is 
an urgency of awareness in our 
world,” and these categories help 
shape the lenses through which 
we see ourselves and others. By 
gaining a better understanding of 
these categories, we can decrease 

our implicit bias and improve our 
subconscious awareness.

• 

Participating in two, hour long 
follow-up meetings.

“It has been incredible to see 
the willingness of those within 
Pennsylvania’s dependency court 
system to gain more individual 
awareness and apply that new 
awareness to the system itself,” 
said Pfarr. “This type of drive and 
application is crucial on the march 
towards systems with equitable 
outcomes for children and families.”

Following Pfarr’s session overview, 
Beaver, Blair, Snyder and Union 
Counties were selected to work more 
directly with Pfarr to further examine 
how having a better understanding 
of these societal categorizations can 
enhance their engagement of families 
and impact their specific county work 
in the FEI and dependency system 
overall.

“We’ve accomplished much in the 
FEI and see this work with Ms. Pfarr 
as being the next step to improving 
the quality of service provided 
to the children and families that 
come before our court,” said Judge 
Michael Sholley
Michael Sholley, Snyder/Union 
Counties. “Knowledge helps us 
understand people’s behavior…not 
to excuse behavior, but to fashion 
our interventions and our systems in 
ways that are more likely to result in 
meaningful change.”

Blair County President Judge 
Elizabeth Doyle added, “We are 
Elizabeth Doyle
excited about this opportunity. It’s a 
significant commitment of judicial time, 
but one that is certain to enhance 
our understanding, meaningful 
engagement of families, and positive 
outcomes for the children and families 
that come before our court.”

These four counties will begin 
their work with Pfarr next month 
(September 2021) and the opportunity 
will include:

•  Reflecting upon how their own life 
experiences shape how they see 
and interact with people, as well 
as how these experiences play 
out in their professional role within 
the Societal System. 
•  Completing an analysis of 

their organization/system and 
creating a plan for moving their 
organization/system towards 
healthier engagement between 
people with differing categories. 
•  Using specific tools and resources 

to assist in their journey. 

Each county group will consist of the 
county dependency judge and child 
welfare administrator, along with 25 
participants selected by the judge 
and administrator. 

“Beaver County has embraced this 
opportunity to unlock our minds 
from the implicit bias that may be 
hindering our path to true, unfettered 
understanding, compassion and 
empathy for those we serve and 
everyone that we interact with in our 
lives,” said Judge Mitchell Shahen
Mitchell Shahen, 
Beaver County. 

Family Engagement Initiative:
Family Engagement Initiative:

“While we are extremely proud of 
the work being done in each FEI 
county and their outcomes are better 
than we imagined possible, we are 
especially excited about the work 
these three judicial districts will be 
doing with Ms. Pfarr,” said Sandy 
Sandy 
MooreMoore, director, Office of Children 
and Families in the Courts. “Gaining 
a deeper understanding of how our 
life experiences impact our interaction 
with others is sure to improve the 
work being done to help children and 
families.”

To date, 15 counties have been 
selected as FEI participants out of 67 
counties:

•  Directly working with Pfarr 2.5 

hours each week for five weeks. 

Beaver, Blair, Butler, Clinton, Dauphin, 
Fayette, Lackawanna, Lehigh, 

14

Northampton, Northumberland, 
Philadelphia, Snyder, Tioga, Union 
and Venango.

These counties have the distinction 
of being selected to enhance their 
system for children and families. All 
15 FEI counties, including dependency 
judges, dependency juvenile court 
hearing officers, attorneys, child 
welfare professionals and state and 
community partners attended the 

virtual education event with Pfarr. 

The overall goal of the FEI is to 
engage families in a more genuine 
and meaningful way so that when 
a child comes into the system, the 
county is reaching out to the family, 
friends and community of that child/
parent to provide support and 
decrease trauma.

It’s no secret that people need 
connections – and sometimes 

those connections get lost. The 
focus for counties is generally to 
help find, sustain and rebuild these 
relationships by enhancing three 
components of practice: 

Enhanced Family Finding
Enhanced Legal Representation 

• 
• 
•  Crisis/Rapid Response Family 

Meetings.

Connected in purpose 

After losing her son Isaiah during a medical emergency 
Alice Rahn and her 
in 2019, AOPC IT Asset Coordinator Alice Rahn
husband decided that each year, they wanted to do 
something special in his honor. 

Last year, they helped to fund a ministry soccer, basketball 
and volleyball field in Haiti, and as they were thinking 
about what to do this year, they felt called to aid another 
international mission. 

“I began learning about human trafficking and as I was in 
prayer about this issue, I felt led to help with the rescue 
efforts. In doing so, we would be connected in purpose 
with Isaiah,” Alice said. 

It was around this same time that their friends were 
building recovery safe houses in Belize and while they 
initially thought about building a recovery house there, 
they soon learned about another couple in Nepal who 
have rescued over 1,000 women and children and were in 
danger of losing their home. 

“One reason we decided to help Nepal is because, the 
victims have to pay for their prosecution, and since many 
are poor, it is a real issue for crime and sexual offenses 
there,” Alice explained. 

“We are lucky to live in a nation that 
prosecutes criminals, but many of the 
people in Nepal don’t have the funds 
to do so. Answer International helps 
to prosecute criminals by paying 
for the prosecution and as a court 
employee, this was a big draw for me.” 

With the goal to help raise $100,000, Alice and her 
husband organized a fundraiser where all funds went to 
Answer International for the purchase of a recovery/safe 
house with a trauma center for sex- trafficked women and 
children.

The fundraising event – held on Aug. 21 at The Dream at 
Top Notch in Bloomfield, Pa. – consisted of a catered meal, 
live entertainment, live and silent auctions, a cash raffle 
and T-shirt sales. Also part of the fundraising efforts was a 
memorial motorcycle ride the week prior on Aug. 14. 

moreinformation More information about the charity is 

available at https://answerinternational.org/. 

15

Pennsylvania Conference of  
State Trial Judges annual meeting

At the end of July, judges from around the state gathered for the Pennsylvania Conference of State 
Trial Judges (PCSTJ) annual meeting. 

Chief Justice 
Max Baer 
Max Baer 
delivered 
opening remarks 
to attendees.

During the 
conference, 
Justice Kevin 
Kevin 
Dougherty met 
Dougherty
with the group 
involved with 
launching the 
Autism and the 
Courts initiative. 
Together, they 
reviewed the 
comprehensive 
results of the 
statewide 
listening tour 
and discussed 
possible next 
steps.

16