## Facts

- A vending machine company, through its representative David Rosen, executed private criminal complaints against former employees Heidi Malloy and James P. Michener, Jr., alleging they drew and endorsed company checks without authority to deprive the company of money.
- The defendants were charged with theft by unlawful taking or disposition, theft by deception, and criminal conspiracy.
- The district attorney approved the private complaints and permitted the company’s private counsel to represent the Commonwealth at the preliminary hearing.
- After the preliminary hearing, a district justice found a prima facie case on all charges, and criminal informations were later filed.
- The defendants petitioned for writs of habeas corpus in the court of common pleas, asserting the preliminary hearing evidence failed to establish a prima facie case.
- The court of common pleas reviewed the preliminary hearing record and dismissed the complaints against both defendants for failure to prove a prima facie case.
- The district attorney declined to appeal and refused to authorize the company to appeal on behalf of the Commonwealth.
- The company filed its own notices of appeal from the dismissal orders; the district attorney moved to quash for lack of standing.

## Issues

1. Whether a crime victim/private complainant has standing, without the district attorney’s consent, to appeal a trial court order dismissing criminal complaints for failure to establish a prima facie case.

## Decision

- The Superior Court of Pennsylvania held the victim/private complainant lacked standing to appeal without the district attorney’s consent.
- The court quashed the appeals.

## Legal Principles

- Criminal prosecutions vindicate public interests and are brought in the name of the Commonwealth, not the victim.
- The district attorney has primary authority and discretion to decide whether to pursue, continue, or appeal criminal prosecutions.
- A victim/private complainant is not a “party” to a criminal prosecution merely because it initiated a private criminal complaint or supplied counsel at a preliminary hearing.
- Absent statutory authorization or action taken through the district attorney, a victim/private complainant may not independently appeal adverse criminal rulings.

## Conclusion

The court concluded that control of criminal litigation, including the decision to appeal a dismissal for lack of a prima facie case, rests with the district attorney; because the victim/private complainant was not a party to the prosecution and lacked authorization to proceed for the Commonwealth, its appeals were quashed.


Commonwealth v. Malloy, 450 A.2d 689 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1982)