No. 44 October Term, 1979, Appeal from Judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, of Cumberland County, Nos. 172 December, 1972 and 183 Support 1978.
Ellen M. Burgraff, Assistant Public Defender, Carlisle, for appellant.
Edgar B. Bayley, District Attorney, Carlisle, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Hester, Cavanaugh and Van der Voort, JJ.
[ 287 Pa. Super. Page 253]
Appellant Larry Wright, Sr., brings this appeal from a judgment of civil contempt entered in two non-support cases in the Court of Common Pleas, Cumberland County. For the reasons which follow, we will reverse.
The first case of non-support had its genesis on October 16, 1972, when appellant was ordered to pay $10.00 per week for the support of his two-year old son, Larry, Jr. Over the next several years, he was often called before the court to answer contempt citations for failing to maintain payments, but in each instance he was found not in contempt on condition he satisfy arrearages. On August 22, 1978, the court issued a bench warrant for appellant's arrest as he had "failed to appear for a hearing as directed." The next event appearing in the record is a hearing on December 8, 1978 in which appellant explained to the court his reasons for failing
[ 287 Pa. Super. Page 254]
to maintain support payments. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court adjudicated him in contempt of court and imposed a six-month prison sentence. In addition, the court ordered the Probation Office to attempt to place appellant in a work release program immediately.
The second non-support case began on March 15, 1978 when appellant was ordered to pay $10.00 per month for the support of his wife Ruth. On August 22, 1978, in the same bench warrant mentioned above, appellant was ordered arrested for failure to appear. Both cases were consolidated for a hearing on December 8, 1978. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found him in contempt in this case as well and imposed the identical prison term with a work release recommendation. The instant appeal is from a single order finding appellant in contempt in both cases.*fn1
In Crislip v. Harshman, 243 Pa. Super. 349, 365 A.2d 1260 (1976), we reviewed the five step process necessary to a civil contempt proceeding.*fn2
(1) a rule to show cause why an attachment should not issue, (2) an answer and hearing, (3) a rule absolute (arrest), (4) a hearing on the contempt ...