State Constables, the best kept secret in PA.

[bort]

The posts below mine are surely correct in my opinion. However, PSC were bared from traffic stops prior to the Court defining traffic infractions a breach of peace. That now changes the situation because PSC can enforce all breaches of Peace. I'm not saying I am correct just a point of view.

Also, Act 49 dissolves a lot because they quietly removed "peace officer" from it. They did reaffirm warrantless/warrant arrest authority though. Just an opinion. There are of course other codes that gives it but those codes were written prior and the new one would take precedence.

The definition of Police officer certainly counts for certain things. A PSC would be defined a Police Officer performing authorized judicial duties and effectuating certain arrest. They would loose that definition if doing things outside the scope.

The littering thing was better written then what I put. A lack of tools which could cause a PSC serious headaches by trying to enforce some basic stuff. The laws are there to do it but the tools are not.

The thing that really erks me is the fact that Sheriffs have received no help from Legislators and the Courts are the ones who have given them their expanded authority thru case laws. PCCD is willing train them Act 120 and PSP refuses to recognize it.

Then you have PSC who need that extra training and PCCD bends over backwards not to give it.

[maynard]

Hello all. I'm new to this forum and spent the past hour reading the 27 pages of posts regarding Constables. Some posts were very entertaining, and others were disheartening. I am a Constable, in my fifth year serving the Commonwealth.

I found the discussion about Constable arrest powers to be interesting. I know what some people including some police & political powers in some areas may say, but I can say that I myself have made warrant-less arrests which have led to persons being incarcerated. One person whom I arrested for violations of firearms law is nearing the end of his three year stay in state prison.

I have also done something that no one has mentioned on here as an authority of the Constable. I actually have filled out a 302 mental health warrant, apprehended the named individual, and committed him to the mental health ward of the hospital. Consequently I had to attend the corresponding 303 hearings in which the judge attending did end up grant that the hospital continue to hold the man in custody of the mental health department longer based off of my testimony and the doctors. The average citizen would not have been able to do what I did, and would have had to of gone through a much different process that in the end might not have been even approved.

In addition, a township in my county has passed a resolution that specifically directs the Constable to enforce ordinances of the township. They then issued that Constable citation books so that he may get the job done. To date, at no expense to the taxpayer, that Constable has brought a considerable amount of income into the township benefiting the residents significantly. I also know of a constable from a neighboring county whom has filed multiple private criminal complaints with the MDJ for violations he witnessed.

I disagree with the notion that Constable's only "duties" are to serve at the polls regardless of the fact that said specific duty is the only one made mandatory by law. In fact, none of the people whom elected me into office voted me in because they wanted a "security officer" at the polls. Each one of them I speak with talk about the concerns they have about crime in the area, and the fact that State Police take often over an hour in a half to come... if even at all. Additionally, the mere fact that various laws specifically provide Constables authority to act (dog law, agricultural law, criminal law, and so on) gives me pause to believe that it was the legislatures intent to put Constables in these various statutes because they wanted Constables to be able to act upon them in the name of the Commonwealth. So I find an issue with someone stating or assuming that our only duty is to serve at the polls, and further I find someone whom gets into office and then does nothing, or only gets into office for the "perk" of being able to carry a firearm easier to be violating ethics and morals required of the office.

All of this argument really is is plain Pennsylvania politics at its worst. The big picture is that all of Pennsylvania law enforcement is behind the times compared to other states because of that fact too. With all the various law enforcement agencies in this state, practically none of them are on the same page, or receive the same certification/training... but each one professes to be the best or have some authority over the other. Couple examples... State police won't let municipal police use radar, many game commission officers will openly state they have more training and have more authority than all police including the state police... humane law enforcement, sheriffs, constables, dog wardens... the list goes on. I thought we were all supposed to be on the same page, yet some officers get all butt hurt if a Constable yells out "Police" when referring to himself when executing a warrant. Even the PCCD states in training constables aren't police, yet PA law, and the Courts have stated that Constable's are police by definition of PA Law! In fact the law states only police can enforce warrants, so if Constables aren't police how do they get issued warrants?

Constable's do a lot at no or very little cost to the taxpayer. The taxpayer doesn't even fund our training. Our training is paid for out of the 5.00 fee that is attached to every citation filed, and every civil case filed in the Commonwealth. I do think that we need more training, and I also feel that the PCCD does not train us appropriately. From what I understand, there is even a lawsuit filed against the PCCD by Constables because of the lack training, or false information being taught. Further, there is an organization with a large membership base that is gaining support, and has legislative proposals that will actually make constable training in the future more like or equal to act 120 training. I think Constables should also have to pass psychological, and physical fitness tests in order to become certified, and I do think that some laws need to be changed that only provide constables firearms exemptions if they are certified. Changes like that would most definitely weed out the bad apples we have right now.

People on here have suggested that people whom become Constables are cop wannabies that couldn't make it to become a police officer... yet I find it ironic that a great deal of Constables are in fact active police officers, retired police officers, or ex-military. In addition, many of us continuously seek to better ourselves by paying for and attending additional training all by ourselves to increase our knowledge and professionalism in the field. Some like myself, even have degrees in criminal justice.

And what people on here and abroad seem to not realize is that Constables are indeed accountable to the people. Not only can we be removed from office by a judge for a myriad of reasons, we can be impeached, and ultimately voted out of office. Has anyone ever had to file complaints about a state trooper, or other agency police. It is nearly impossible at times, and it is even harder to get a trooper or the average officer removed from their positions.

After 27 pages of a wide spectrum of topics regarding Constables I had to respond to what I could remember, because I respect the office I hold, see it as an important office, and think it serves the commonwealth a very valuable purpose and does so way more efficiently than any other form of LE across the state can. I also think that Constables, with more training, should be doing much more than they typically do today.. But again, politics is the enemy of all people, and it is no different for the office of the constable.

doesn't matter that you disagree with the fact that a constable is only elected to work the polls...

that's a fact my friend, you may think the public elected you to do more. unfortunately all across our 67 counties, may voter's don't have a clue what we do...

I run into people all the time in different localities (in uniform) and they ask, what is a constable?!

if you decide to work for the courts, you go and get certified, nobody told you, you have too...

once again, the only time we are considered a police officer is when serving warrant's for the courts that directed us to...period...that end's our authority.

it's awesome you volunteer your time to help in the community, one day you may get sued, and remember I hope there's a clause in your insurance that indicates you are covered for these other things you mentioned you do.

I'm not trying to bash you, I'm politely informing you, we don't have all this authority you say, or think we do.

It's been a long time since I've been out here, yet, to me you all still argue about the same we argued about year's ago...amazing.

maynard

[Oscar8]

Maynard,

As I stated in a previous post... Simply because working the polls is the only duty actually mandated by law that also holds a penalty for not performing said duty does not mean that is our only duty. I think that since the legislature has not changed the statutes and even still named Constable in recent legislation that was passed concerning forestry laws shows that the legislature provided the authority for Constables to do such enforcement. Therefore I would consider that then to be one of many dutied bestowed upon Constables by law. The statutes are in black and white, and the wording is not vague to the point that one cannot ascertain the meanings of them. Woulf I reccommend that a Constable try to enforce forestry laws. I think he could because the statutes direct him to. However I would not recommend it at this point because our current training does not discuss forestry law like it does criminal law. I think case law suggests that ones training is what is considered in addition to the law as written. PCCD should be training in accordance with the law as written by the legislature pertaining to Constables. And if we do not have the authority as written, then the legislature needs to simply pass a law that strips that authority.

With no disrespect sir, you sound very similar to some of the old timers from the PSC Association whom have let our authority slip away. we wont get into the whole PSC Association discussion though. Up until the 90's Constables were doing far more than what is seen today. That being said, a lack of use does not equal a loss of the ability though until the law is changed to specifically deny Constables the authority we do in fact have.

so respectfully, we will have to agree to disagree on this issue. As I stated before, the issue surrounding Constables is training. Unfortunately the PCCD does not provide the training that effectively prepares us to do our jobs. Dont you find it funny that the PCCD doesnt even train us in regard to our duties at the Polls... According to you that is our only duty.. yet no training for it. Politics and the PCCD... not the law as written. last I knew there was a process to legally remove statutory authority. That process has nothing to do with the political discontent of a few and there personal view. It requires the house.. the senate... and the signature of the governor. That has yet to happen. Sorry to dissapoint you.


It is the constable's job to enforce the law and carry it out, just the same as the job of district attorney's, sheriffs and the police generally" (see In Re Act 147 of 1990, 528 Pa., at470, 598 A.2d 9S5.

[Oscar8]

PSC were bared from traffic stops prior to the Court defining traffic infractions a breach of peace. That now changes the situation because PSC can enforce all breaches of Peace. I'm not saying I am correct just a point of view.

Bort.. I agree. And interestingly enough that was the same contention made by dissenting judges in one of the Courts decisions. I dont remember the name of the case, but I know it regarded two Constables who pulled over a guy whom was then charged and jailed for DUI.

Although the majority opinion in that case takes a higher precedent, this is not to say that a different court, or a future court will not agree with the dissenting judges and reverse the premise set by that case. This does happen. Training is the biggest issue. Other issues are getting resolved slowly but surely (such as uniform requirements, vehicle requirements, training requirements, ect.)

[Deleted]

PSC were bared from traffic stops prior to the Court defining traffic infractions a breach of peace. That now changes the situation because PSC can enforce all breaches of Peace. I'm not saying I am correct just a point of view.

It doesn't matter if a traffic violation is a breach of the peace or not... the State Supreme was VERY clear that traffic stops are a NO NO for Constables.

As I posted before......

Comm v. Roose is the case where the Pa Supreme Court ruled that Constables do not have the authority to enforce the vehicle code. This is because there is no statutory authority for a Constable to do so.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/pa-suprem...t/1211961.html

[DaveM55]

PSC were bared from traffic stops prior to the Court defining traffic infractions a breach of peace. That now changes the situation because PSC can enforce all breaches of Peace. I'm not saying I am correct just a point of view.

Bort.. I agree. And interestingly enough that was the same contention made by dissenting judges in one of the Courts decisions. I dont remember the name of the case, but I know it regarded two Constables who pulled over a guy whom was then charged and jailed for DUI.

Although the majority opinion in that case takes a higher precedent, this is not to say that a different court, or a future court will not agree with the dissenting judges and reverse the premise set by that case. This does happen. Training is the biggest issue. Other issues are getting resolved slowly but surely (such as uniform requirements, vehicle requirements, training requirements, ect.)

Curious how would a PSC pull someone over on the road if they are not allowed lights and sirens. I wouldn't pull over for anyone in an unmarked car that didn't have at a minimum lights and sirens. Four way flashers and someone pointing for me to pull over ain't going to work, but I will call 9-1-1 to report you.

[Adam-12]

Curious how would a PSC pull someone over on the road if they are not allowed lights and sirens. I wouldn't pull over for anyone in an unmarked car that didn't have at a minimum lights and sirens. Four way flashers and someone pointing for me to pull over ain't going to work, but I will call 9-1-1 to report you.

Agreed. It's hard to imagine a scenario where, logistically, a constable could do anything about a breach of the peace involving a vehicle. There's also the practical matter that (1) nobody pays us to perform on view arrests for breach of the peace, (2) the PCCD intentionally refuses to train us on the ins and outs of on view arrest, (3) the police are misinformed about, or ignorant of, the statutory powers of constables, and (4) police will gleefully release a constable's arrestee, and arrest the constable instead.

So the statutory power is quite plainly there--you can just read the statutes--but a constable who exercised them would be fucked six ways to Sunday.

[Oscar8]

I have clearly indicated that Constables have no authority to perform traffic stops. What I said was that dissenting opinions from judges in a particular case basically stated that the case at hand was very similar to a case concerning Sheriffs, and based off of the Courts prior decision regarding Sheriffs, Constables also have the same authority but what standard the Court uses to determine whether a Sheriff or Constable can enforce the vehicle code relies on whether or not they had equivalent training as municipal police.

I do think that that arguement is valid when you think about it. However, I do understand that it is a dissenting opinion. I was just pointing it out, rather than trying to argue that we can do traffic stops now.

"There's also the practical matter that (1) nobody pays us to perform on view arrests for breach of the peace, (2) the PCCD intentionally refuses to train us on the ins and outs of on view arrest, (3) the police are misinformed about, or ignorant of, the statutory powers of constables, and (4) police will gleefully release a constable's arrestee, and arrest the constable instead.

So the statutory power is quite plainly there--you can just read the statutes--but a constable who exercised them would be fucked six ways to Sunday."

1. there used to be a fee schedule for constables whom wrote citations/made arrests on view for infractions up until the 90's. This was changed after the state Constable association decided they cared more about serving civils and landlord tennants because it was easier and more lucrative in some areas. Thereforevthose fees were dropped in the establishment of the new fee bill simply because of a lack of use... not because a law no longer allows us to perform those duties. We should be fighting for those fees back as constables could perform those functions very efficiently and at no cost to the state.

2. it is my understanding the the PAFOC and some of its members have a few lawsuits filed against the state. In addition it is my understanding that there is also a lawsuit filed against the PCCD that addresses the issue of the PCCD not training us appropriately. I will try to find out where this case is exactly. It is my understanding that at this point both sides are presenting their breifs to the court.

3. police and others bieng misinformed is not a reason for constables to lose their authority. if a constable decides that he wont act because of others ignorance.. well that is his perogative. Constables across the State should all come together and work together to educate the misinformed. merely accepting the fact that some are misinformed is rediculous. cmon folks perhaps we would get more respect if more of us grew a spine rather than simply buckling under pressure.

4. I have made warrantless arrests as a Constable, which have been upheld by the Courts so far. In fact, my subject is soon to be released from his near three year stay in state prison. Further, citations written by a Ross twp. Constable in Chestnuthill twp have also been upheld not only in the MDJ court, but in the Common Pleas Court as well. Cops in NY whom arrested a Constable had to pay a hefty sum for falsely arresting and imprisoning a Pa Constable.

5. A constable should revert to his training and decide whether he can fully and effectively articulate why he does what he does regarding an on view arrest. Simply buckling out of fear that some misinformed cop might illegally arrest a Constable might be the choice of some, however it is not the choice of all Constables. Those whom are afraid to stand up to the political pressure should just get out of our way. I will take my chances at any challenge to my actions.

6. Us Constables whom are not like those whom simply want accept the status quo we see today, are actively working with and gaining support from legislatures to not only help to establish new laws and standards for Constables to meet, but to also fix the grey areas of the law, and to establish law that requires the resisting political powers to provide us the proper tools and training to do our jobs. You can be on board or not, if not... again just get out of our way.

[twency]

Maynard,

As I stated in a previous post... Simply because working the polls is the only duty actually mandated by law that also holds a penalty for not performing said duty does not mean that is our only duty. I think that since the legislature has not changed the statutes and even still named Constable in recent legislation that was passed concerning forestry laws shows that the legislature provided the authority for Constables to do such enforcement. …

"Duty" and "authority" are not synonyms.

The former refers to the obligation to act in a particular way. The latter refers to the legitimacy to act in a particular way.

Duty normally carries authority with it, but authority might not carry duty.

[Adam-12]

Oscar, please don't accuse me of buckling to the status quo. I was--accurately--pointing out reasons why exercising the power we clearly DO have, carries a high risk of getting severely fucked in the ass. I'm fully aware that the situation exists because the legislature, the PCCD, the PSP, and constables themselves, are working hard to fuck us over every chance they get. That was... kind of my point.