Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 9303 (2026)

Liability for violations of general and specific criminal statutes.

✓ 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

§ 9303. Liability for violations of general and specific criminal statutes.

Notwithstanding the provisions of 1 Pa.C.S. § 1933 (relating to particular controls general) or any other statute to the contrary, where the same conduct of a defendant violates more than one criminal statute, the defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the generality or specificity of the statutes.

(Dec. 9, 2002, P.L.1705, No.215, eff. 60 days)

2002 Amendment. Act 215 added section 9303.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Karetny, 880 A.2d 505 (Pa. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Karetny, 880 A.2d 505 (Pa. 2005). · cites it 3× “On appeal to this Court, the Commonwealth notes that the enactment of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303 has abrogated operation of the Section 1933 “general-specific” rule of statutory construction in the context of criminal prosecutions.”

Commonwealth v. Estman, 915 A.2d 1191 (Pa. 2007). · cites it 8× “Appellee Barbara Jean Estman ("Estman") was a tax collector for Lackawannock Township and West Middlesex School District from 1987 to 2001.”

In the Interest of: R.A.F., a Minor, 149 A.3d 63 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). · cites it 6× “Even then, the specific-general rule has been abrogated in the context of criminal prosecutions by the enactment of 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303 in 2002. That provision states: Notwithstanding the provisions of 1 Pa.”

Commonwealth v. Nypaver, 69 A.3d 708 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2013). · cites it 2× “However, since dissemination of all of the above decisions discussing whether a prosecution under the Crimes Code can proceed where a defendant’s conduct is penalized under another act specifically covering the conduct, the principle applied in those cases was abrogated by the…”

Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Ortiz, T., 197 A.3d 256 (Pa. 2018). · cites it 4× “§ 1933 (relating to particular controls general) or any other statute to the contrary, where the same conduct of a defendant violates more than one criminal statute, the defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the…”

Commonwealth v. Estman, 868 A.2d 1210 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005). “544[, Reinstituting Charges Following Withdrawal or Dismissal], [Appellee’s] Motion to Dismiss [was] based upon the argument that 42 Pa. C.S. § 9303 [Liability for violations of general and specific criminal statutes,] may not be applied retroactively because it effects…”

Com. v. Howell, A. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “Relying on 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303, the Commonwealth asserts that “where two statutes define identical conduct, deciding which to apply is a matter of prosecutorial discretion.”

Com. v. Hill-El, K. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015). · cites it 2× “§ 9303, provides that “where the same conduct of a defendant violates more than one criminal statute, the defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the generality or specificity of the statutes.”

Com. v. White, S. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2017). “This Court rejected the defendant’s argument because under Section 9303 of the Judicial Code, “a defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the generality or specificity of the statutes.”

Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Ortiz, T. (Pa. 2018). “See 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303 (“[n]otwithstanding the provisions of 1 Pa.”

Com. v. Stoughton, R. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022). “42 Pa.C.S. § 9303. Therefore, Appellant’s reliance on the “general/specific rule” is erroneous, and the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying Appellant’s motion to quash.”

Commonwealth v. Satterfield, J., Aplt. (Pa. 2021). “(citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 9303 (where the same conduct of a defendant violates more than one criminal statute, the defendant may be prosecuted under all available statutory criminal provisions without regard to the generality or specificity of the statutes)).”

Show all 14 citing cases →

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.