COMMONWEALTH EX REL. REBERT v. RAMBLER, (Quo Warranto)

Leagle.com ^ | March 17, 2010 | CLELAND, J

[SvenMagnussen]

COMMONWEALTH EX REL. REBERT v. RAMBLER, 2010 PA. Super 40, Superior Court of Pennsylvania

OPINION BY CLELAND, J.:

¶ 1 Appellant Stephen D. Rambler, the elected mayor of Wrightsville, Pennsylvania, appeals the trial court order granting the motion for judgment on the pleadings by the District Attorney of York County, on behalf of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in a quo warranto proceeding. Believing appellate jurisdiction may instead lie with the Supreme Court under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 722(2), Rambler has also filed an Application for Transfer of his appeal to the Supreme Court. For reasons that follow, we conclude jurisdiction lies with the Superior Court, we vacate the trial court's order and we remand for entry of judgment in favor of Rambler.

¶ 2 On January 2, 2006, Rambler assumed the office of mayor after his November 8, 2005 election. On March 28, 2006, the District Attorney filed a complaint in quo warranto seeking the ouster of Rambler from his mayoral office pursuant to Article II, § 7 (Ineligibility by criminal convictions) of the Pennsylvania Constitution which provides: "No person hereafter convicted of embezzlement of public moneys, bribery, perjury or other infamous crime, shall be eligible to the General Assembly, or capable of holding any office of trust or profit in this Commonwealth." Ten years earlier, in February 1996, Rambler pled guilty to a federal felony charge of Mailing Threatening Communications, 18 U.S.C. § 876(d), a crime carrying a maximum two year sentence. Complaint at ¶ 8. Rambler served a two year probationary sentence. The charges were based on Rambler's sending each of approximately 30 letters threatening to release sexually explicit photographs to the public unless he received $50.

[SvenMagnussen]

¶ 20 In conclusion, we hold the Supreme Court does not have exclusive jurisdiction of this appeal, and we further hold the trial court erred in granting the District Attorney's motion for judgment on the pleadings. Accordingly, we deny Rambler's Application for Transfer, and we vacate the trial court order of judgment on the pleadings for the District Attorney and remand for entry of judgment in favor of Rambler.[ 6 ] Jurisdiction relinquished.