Commission discusses Act 44 implementation challenges and implications of Commonwealth v. Lee for murder‑2 sentencing

Commission staff used the June meeting to brief members on two major policy items that could reshape sentencing practice in Pennsylvania: implementation questions from Act 44 (probation reform) and implications following the Supreme Court’s Commonwealth v. Lee decision about murder‑2 sentencing.

On Act 44, staff said recent superior court opinions have answered many earlier uncertainties but practical implementation challenges remain. Defense counsel and judges described situations in which treatment or specialty court participants who accumulate multiple technical violations prior to a judicial finding face the statute’s restriction on total confinement for early violations. One attorney told the commission that some counties are reconsidering how they operate drug courts because an accumulated set of infractions can limit a judge’s ability to order confinement beyond the 14‑day maximum prescribed for certain early technical violations. Staff recommended continued monitoring, practitioner outreach and suggested a judges’ subcommittee to pursue potential fixes rather than immediate change to commission guidance.

The commission also spent time on Commonwealth v. Lee. Staff explained that the ETH edition previously assigned offense gravity scores for murder‑1 and murder‑2 (score 15) largely to capture voluntary reporting and properly calculate prior‑record interactions. The Lee decision removed life without the possibility of parole as the statutory sole sanction for murder‑2, restoring discretion to sentencing courts. Because the commission’s ETH matrix currently displays an offense gravity score and a matrix recommendation that mirrors statutory maximums, staff urged caution: if nothing changes, the matrix would appear to recommend life without parole for murder‑2 offenses. Staff advised waiting for the 120‑day stay to expire and for any legislative action before amending the guidelines; they observed that when similar juvenile sentencing changes occurred, the commission later aligned guidance to legislative direction.

Senator Street said he and colleagues introduced Senate Bill 387, which would create parole eligibility after 25 years for certain adult murder‑one sentences and a lower threshold for juvenile offenders; staff estimated that the policy could put roughly 1,500 individuals into parole eligibility over time and said the parole board would likely need guidance if the legislation passes. Staff said they will continue to track case law, legislation and practical effects and to report back to the commission.