IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WESTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA , : No. 423 WAL 2018
:
Respondent :
: Petition for Allowance of Appeal from
: the Order of the Superior Court
v. :
:
:
ROD L. JONES, JR., :
:
Petitioner :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 30th day of April, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is
GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issues set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all
remaining issues. The issues, slightly rephrased for clarity, are:
(1) Whether testimony from a detective about victim responses
and behaviors, when based on that detective’s training,
experience, and specialized knowledge, constitutes expert
testimony and whether permitting such testimony from a lay
witness is inconsistent with the plain language of Pa.R.E. 701,
Pa.R.E. 702, and Commonwealth v. Huggins, 68 A.3d 962
(Pa. Super. 2013)?
(2) Whether the General Assembly’s enactment of 42 Pa.C.S. §
5920 (relating to expert testimony in certain criminal
proceedings) legislatively overruled this Honorable Court’s
decision in Commonwealth v. Dunkle, 602 A.2d 830 (Pa.
1992), which held that specific types of victim responses and
behaviors are within the range of common experience, easily
understood by lay people, and for which expert analysis is
inappropriate?