More Categories

Rule 606 – Challenges to Sufficiency of Evidence

May 14, 2021 | Criminal Procedure, Pennsylvania

(A) A defendant may challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction of one or more of the offenses charged in one or more of the following ways:

(1) a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the Commonwealth’s case-in-chief;
(2) a motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence;
(3) a motion for judgment of acquittal filed within 10 days after the jury has been discharged without agreeing upon a verdict;
(4) a motion for judgment of acquittal made orally immediately after verdict;
(5) a motion for judgment of acquittal made orally before sentencing pursuant to Rule 704(B);
(6) a motion for judgment of acquittal made after sentence is imposed pursuant to Rule 720 (B); or
(7) a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence made on appeal.
(B) A motion for judgment of acquittal shall not constitute an admission of any facts or inferences except for the purpose of deciding the motion. If the motion is made at the close of the Commonwealth’s evidence and is not granted, the defendant may present evidence without having reserved the right to do so, and the case shall otherwise proceed as if the motion had not been made.
(C) If a defendant moves for judgment of acquittal at the close of all the evidence, the court may reserve decision until after the jury returns a guilty verdict or after the jury is discharged without agreeing upon a verdict.

234 Pa. Code ยง 606

Committee Explanatory Reports:

Final Report explaining the March 22, 1993 amendments published with the Court’s Order at 23 Pa.B. 1699 (April 10, 1993).

Final Report explaining the October 15, 1997 Comment revision concerning weight of the evidence claims published with the Court’s Order at 27 Pa.B. 5599 (November 1, 1997).

Final Report explaining the March 1, 2000 reorganization and renumbering of the rules published with the Court’s Order at 30 Pa.B. 1477 (March 18, 2000).