Commonwealth v. Jenkins, B., Aplt.

Summary

Justice Wecht, in a concurring opinion, agrees that the trial court erred in revoking Jenkins’ participation in the accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD) program because the alleged omission occurred before Jenkins entered the program and the statutory language of § 3807(e) and Rule 318 does not permit revocation on that basis. He stresses that courts must apply the clear, plain meaning of the statute and may not substitute a nebulous “spirit of the law” for the text. The opinion also clarifies that an uncharged arrest is not a pending charge and therefore need not be disclosed on the ARD application.