Pa. Supreme Court – June 3, 2013
Rule 1114. [Considerations] Standards Governing Allowance of
Appeal.
(a) General Rule. Except as prescribed in [Rule] Pa.R.A.P. 1101 (appeals as of right from
the Commonwealth Court), review of a final order of the Superior Court or the Commonwealth
Court is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion, and an appeal
will be allowed only when there are special and important reasons therefor.
(b) Standards. A petition for allowance of appeal may be granted
for any of the following reasons:
(1) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts
with another intermediate appellate court opinion;
(2) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts
with a holdinof the Pennsylvania Supreme Court or the United States Supreme Court
on the same legal question;
(3) the question presented is one of first impression;
(4) the question presented is one of such substantial public
importance as to require prompt and definitive resolution by the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court;
(5) the issue involves the constitutionality of a statute of the
Commonwealth;
(6) the intermediate appellate court has so far departed from
accepted judicial practices or so abused its discretion as to call for the
exercise of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s supervisory authority; or
(7) the intermediate appellate court has erroneously entered an
order quashing or dismissing an appeal.
Official
Note
The petition for allowance of appeal is synonymous with a
petition for allocatur. Pa.R.A.P. 1114(b)(7) supersedes the practice described
in Vaccone v. Syken, 587 Pa. 380, 384 n.2, 899 A.2d 1103, 1106 n.2 (2006). [Based
in part on U.S. Supreme Court Rule 10. The following, while neither controlling
nor fully measuring the discretion of the Supreme Court, indicate the character
of the reasons which will be considered:
(1) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts
with another
intermediate appellate court opinion;
(2) the holding of the intermediate appellate court conflicts
with a holding
of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court or the United States Supreme
Court on the
same legal question;
(3) the question presented is one of first impression;
2
(4) the question presented is of such substantial public
importance as to
require prompt and definitive resolution by the Pennsylvania
Supreme Court;
(5) the issue involves the constitutionality of a statute of
this
Commonwealth;
(6) the intermediate appellate court has so far departed from
accepted
judicial practices or so abused its discretion as to call for
the exercise of the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s supervisory authority; or
(7) an intermediate appellate court has erroneously entered an
order
quashing or dismissing an appeal.
Prior to the 2011 amendment to the Official Note to this Rule,
the procedural
mechanism to seek the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s review of an
intermediate
appellate court order quashing or dismissing an appeal was by
petition for
review. See Vaccone v. Syken,
587 Pa. 380, 382 n.2, 899 A.2d 1103, 1104 n.2
(2006). The current amendments now provide that such appeals
should be
pursued by the petition for allowance of appeal process. The
2011 amendment
adds Reason (7) to the Official Note, which provides a basis for
seeking review of
intermediate appellate court quashals and dismissals through the
Chapter 11
petition for allowance of appeal procedure, rather than the
Chapter 15 petition for
review procedure.]
Rule 1702. Stay Ancillary to Appeal
* * * *
*
[(d) Stay
of execution.—When a trial court enters an
order granting or denying a
stay of execution in a capital case, such order may be reviewed
by the Supreme
Court upon application pursuant to Rule 123. No appeal or
petition for review
need be filed in connection with an application for review of a
stay order in a
capital case.]
* * * *
*
[This
is an entirely new rule.]
Rule 1704. Application in a Capital Case for a Stay of Execution
or for Review of
an Order Granting or Denying a Stay of Execution.
Prior notice
of the intent to file an application in a capital case for a stay or review
of an
order granting or denying a stay of execution shall be provided to the
Prothonotary
of the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court, if prior notice is practicable.
The
application for stay or review shall set forth the following:
1. The
date the warrant issued; the date and nature of the order that
prompted
the issuance of the warrant; and the date the execution is scheduled, if a date
has
been set;
2.
Whether any direct or collateral challenges to the underlying conviction
are
pending, and, if so, in what court(s) or tribunal(s);
3.
Whether any other applications for a stay of the pending execution have
been
filed, and, if so, in what court(s) or tribunal(s), when, and the status of the
application(s);
4. The
grounds for relief and the showing made to the trial court of
entitlement
to a stay under 42 Pa.C.S. § 9545(c), if applicable;
5. A
statement certifying that emergency action is required and setting forth a
description
of the emergency.
All
dockets, pleadings, and orders that are referred to in 1-5 above must be
attached
to the application. If any of the information provided in the application
changes
while
the motion is pending, the party seeking the stay or review must file with the
Pennsylvania
Supreme Court written notice of the change within 24 hours.
No
notice of appeal or petition for review needs to be filed in order to file an
application
under this rule.
Rule 3316. Review of Stay of Execution Orders in Capital Cases.
When a
trial court has entered an order granting or denying a stay of execution in
a
capital case, such order may be reviewed by the Supreme Court in the manner
prescribed
in [Rule 1702(d)] Pa.R.A.P. 1704.
* * * *
4
[This
is an entirely new rule.]
Rule 3341. Petitions for Certification of Questions of
Pennsylvania Law
(a) General Rule.—On the motion of a party or
sua sponte, any of the following courts
may
file a petition for certification with the Prothonotary of the Supreme Court:
(1) The
United States Supreme Court; or
(2) Any
United States Court of Appeals.
(b) Content of the Petition for Certification.—A
petition for certification need not be
set
forth in numbered paragraphs in the manner of a pleading, and shall contain the
following
(which shall, insofar as practicable, be set forth in the order stated):
(1) A
brief statement of the nature and stage of the proceedings in the petitioning
court;
(2) A
brief statement of the material facts of the case;
(3) A
statement of the question or questions of Pennsylvania law to be determined;
(4) A
statement of the particular reasons why the Supreme Court should accept
certification;
and
(5) A
recommendation about which party should be designated Appellant and
which
Appellee in subsequent pleadings filed with the Supreme Court.
There
shall be appended to the petition for certification copies of any papers filed
by
the
parties regarding certification, e.g., a motion for certification, a response
thereto, a
stipulation
of facts, etc.
(c) Standards.—The Supreme Court shall not
accept certification unless all facts
material
to the question of law to be determined are undisputed, and the question of law
is
one
that the petitioning court has not previously decided. The Supreme Court may
accept
certification
of a question of Pennsylvania law only where there are special and important
reasons
therefor, including, but not limited to, any of the following:
(1) The
question of law is one of first impression and is of such substantial public
importance
as to require prompt and definitive resolution by the Supreme Court;
(2) The
question of law is one with respect to which there are conflicting decisions
in
other courts; or
(3) The
question of law concerns an unsettled issue of the constitutionality,
construction, or application of a statute of this Commonwealth.
