DC is a catchall that cops like to use when they know they can’t arrest you for any real reason.

a.Offense defined. — A person is guilty of disorderly conduct if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, he:
1.engages in fighting or threatening, or in violent or tumultuous behavior;
2.makes unreasonable noise;
3.uses obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture; or
4.creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose of the actor.
Though this section does not deal with firearms, due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. Since a person who is not licensed per §6109 or exempted by §6106(b) MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition. There are also two cases that that specifically state that a person may carry a firearm openly: Commonwealth v. Ortiz and Commonwealth v. Hawkins.

In summary, with case law to support, OC is legal and does “serve a legitimate purpose of the

I’ve received nothing in the mail about any charges.

I will file a Habeas on his behalf if we can’t find him, since if he’s been whisked away, he probably has no avenue to reach the courts himself. Hopefully there is some judge around honest enough to demand his production.

George Donnelly vs Steven Seagal: Lawman in a no-holds-barred battle of stubbornness in the Warwick Diner

GO!

I noticed that about the citation, too. He told me I would get it in the mail.

That just makes me even more convinced he was trying to “break” me and when I didn’t break he felt he had to save face and follow it through with a visit to jail.

I just saw a charge on someone’s docket the other day: “Improp Sunscreening”. Is the nature of that charge “not applying a cream with an appropriate SPF rating?” Anything is possible.

It has further occurred to me that the officer did not follow Rule 441, which states that a citation must be issued following release from custody after arrest, or the defendant must be brought before a magistrate. If this officer somehow thought he was detaining instead of arresting, the officer needs a good reason not to issue the citation at the time of having probable cause of the summary offense, per Rule 410; otherwise, the citation should have been issued and the officer had to file the citations with the proper MDJ within 5 days, per Rule 406.

Arrests for summary offenses must be specifically designated by law (IIRC) and the whole summary case system is supposed to be designed to avoid such things except where extremely necessary. See Committee Introduction to Chapter 4: (right under the table of contents on that page) and read Rule 441 of the PA Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Good questions, the “conditions vary” regarding arrest for DC is an important data point. The “trumped up” question was a bit of a cheap shot, and doesn’t help you here, but it could probably be reworded in a more constructive way. Otherwise, good work. Don’t hold your breath, but there is a chance that the DA may decide to go after the cop and not you.

I’d make an effort to get witness statements preemptively. You can bet the cops who do interview them will be very manipulative in getting the answers they want, and getting those witnesses to believe those answers even if they are utterly false.

Since the DA has this, you want a lawyer. Now.

[...] Warwick Police Pass My Case Up to Bucks County District Attorney, No Charges Filed Against Me Yet 13 Jan 2010 [...]