Pennsylvania Supreme Court rejects challenge to overdose drug delivery laws

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has declined to implement new legal protections for defendants accused of supplying drugs that lead to fatal overdoses. In a majority opinion, the justices upheld convictions in two separate cases, ruling that state law provides a broad definition of “delivery” that “does not differentiate between drug dealers and co-users for purposes of delivery of illegal narcotics.”

The ruling addresses ongoing criticism that overdose death prosecutions in the state often target fellow drug users rather than high-level dealers. While Justice Daniel McCaffery acknowledged that the proposed defense “makes sense” and noted that many believe dealers should be punished more severely than users, he stated that such policy determinations belong to the General Assembly rather than the courts.

In a concurring opinion, Justice David Wecht noted that while the “spirit of the law is in considerable tension with its text,” the court is bound by the written statute. He remarked that the General Assembly “does not violate the Constitution when it violates common sense,” acknowledging that the drug delivery resulting in death (DDRD) statute was likely intended to target dealers, even if the text applies to users.