Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8702 (2026)

  Impaneling jury from another county.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 8702.  Impaneling jury from another county.

(a)  General rule.--If, upon motion and following a hearing, the court of common pleas determines that a fair and impartial jury cannot be impaneled in the county where the criminal complaint is filed, as an alternative to issuing an order for a change of venue the court may direct that jurors be impaneled from another county. The order for impanelment of a jury from another county shall be certified forthwith to the Supreme Court which shall designate and notify the county of impanelment.

(b)  Impanelment and transportation.--The jury shall be impaneled as in other cases in the county where the jury is to be impaneled and transported to the county where the complaint is filed.

(c)  Payment of costs.--All costs incurred under this section shall be paid by the county where the complaint is filed.

(d)  Change of venue powers unaffected.--This section does not lessen the power of the court of common pleas to order a change of venue.

(Apr. 1, 1980, P.L.62, No.25, eff. imd.)

 

1980 Amendment.  Act 25 added section 8702.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1980–2022 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Mulholland, 702 A.2d 1027 (Pa. 1997).
Commonwealth v. Mulholland, 702 A.2d 1027 (Pa. 1997). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702 and Pa.R.Crim.P. 312(b), this court designated Chester County for summoning, selecting, and impanelling a jury to try Mulholland and Albert.”
Commonwealth v. Coder, 415 A.2d 406 (Pa. 1980). · cites it 2× “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702(c). The majority's determination to ignore these plain mandates, as well as its failure to protect fundamental constitutional rights, once again unnecessarily forces a Pennsylvania litigant to seek redress in a federal court for vindication of rights that…”
Capital Cities Media, Inc. v. Toole, 483 A.2d 1339 (Pa. 1984). “After the defendant’s motion for a change of venire had been granted and a jury empanelled in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702; Pa.R.Crim.P. 312(d), the trial judge, the Honorable Patrick J.”
In Re: Order Amending Rule 311 & 312 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure (Pa. 2022). · cites it 2× “Subparagraph (a)(3)—Change of venire is authorized by 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702. Pa.R.Crim.P. 584 treats changes of venue and venire the same.”
In Re: Order Amending Rule 311 & 312 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure (Pa. 2022). “Subparagraph (a)(3)—Change of venire is authorized by 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702. Pa.R.Crim.P. 584 treats changes of venue and venire the same.”
In Re: Order Amending Rule 311, 341, & 904 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Appellate Procedure (Pa. 2015). “] Subparagraph (a)(3)--Change of venire is authorized by 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702 [(impaneling jury from another county)].”
— 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 8702(c) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Coder, 415 A.2d 406 (Pa. 1980). “" 42 Pa.C.S. § 8702(c). The majority's determination to ignore these plain mandates, as well as its failure to protect fundamental constitutional rights, once again unnecessarily forces a Pennsylvania litigant to seek redress in a federal court for vindication of rights that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.