Pennsylvania House Bill HB239

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/22/25

Caption

In governance of the system, further providing for costs; in budget and finance, further providing for Commonwealth portion of fines, etc; and, in facilities and supplies, further providing for deposits into account.

Impact

If enacted, HB239 would standardize the cost structure within Pennsylvania's judicial system, particularly concerning how costs for summary convictions, misdemeanors, and felonies are charged. For instance, the revisions introduce different fee amounts that would include costs associated with judicial transcripts and paperwork. Such changes could streamline revenue collection for the court system while potentially alleviating burdens on the court's administrative processes. Moreover, by defining clear costs for various classifications of criminal cases, the bill aims to ensure uniformity in how the minor judiciary operates across different regions within the state.

Summary

House Bill 239 seeks to amend provisions of Title 42 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes relating to costs associated with criminal cases, as well as fees and fines collected by the Commonwealth. The bill specifically revises the costs that the minor judiciary and court of common pleas may charge for different types of convictions, including summary convictions and misdemeanors. This proposed legislation reflects an effort to update the cost structures to better correlate with current judicial practices and operational needs.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB239 appears to be cautiously optimistic. Supporters of the bill largely see the adjustments to the costs as necessary updates that will enhance judicial efficiency and effectiveness. However, there is a recognition of the need to balance these updates with the implications they may have on individuals facing criminal charges, as adjustments in costs can impact those with limited financial means. This nuance in sentiment underscores a recognition of the broader implications of judicial reforms and the importance of maintaining fairness within the legal framework.

Contention

Despite the overall support for streamlined judicial costs, there may be points of contention regarding the specific amounts of fees proposed, as certain advocacy groups and individuals may argue that increasing costs could disproportionately affect low-income individuals. The discussions around HB239 highlight a crucial balance between providing the courts with necessary funding while ensuring that access to justice remains a priority, particularly for vulnerable populations in Pennsylvania's criminal justice system.