PENNSYLVANIA
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania – via BishopAccountability.org
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
EASTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
Appellant
v.
WILLIAM LYNN,
Appellee
No. 15 EAP 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Superior
Court entered on 12/26/13 at No. 2171
EDA 2012 reversing the judgment of
sentence entered on 7/24/12 in the
Court of Common Pleas, Criminal
Division, Philadelphia County at No.
CP-51-CR-0003530-2011
ARGUED: November 18, 2014
DISSENTING OPINION
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: April 27, 2015
Because I differ with the majority’s interpretation of the endangerment statute reposed in Section 4304(a) of the Crimes Code, I respectfully dissent.
Preliminarily, the evidence viewed favorably to the Commonwealth suggests that Appellee is indeed guilty of gross derelictions which caused widespread harm. The only question before the Court, however, is whether the text of the endangerment statute, as it existed in the pre-amendment timeframe, allowed the imposition of criminal culpability upon Appellee. For the reasons which follow, I would find that it did not.
The statute makes it an offense for a “parent, guardian or other person supervising the welfare of a child” to knowingly endanger a child’s welfare by violating a duty of care, protection, or support. 18 Pa.C.S. §4304(a) (1995), quoted in Majority Opinion, slip op. at 19. The principal issue in this appeal pertains to the “supervision” element of the pre-amendment offense.
Note: This is an Abuse Tracker excerpt. Click the title to view the full text of the original article. If the original article is no longer available, see our News Archive.