Past-results notice: This page describes a prior matter for informational purposes. Every case depends on its own facts and law, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Reckless Endangerment Defense Attorneys in Easton Pennsylvania, Serving Lehigh & Northampton County
Our Reckless Endangerment Defense Attorneys Represent Defendants in Allentown, Bethlehem & Easton and throughout the Greater Lehigh Valley
Our Violent Crime Criminal Defense Attorneys have represented numerous individuals charged with Recklessly Endangering Another Person in Easton, Allentown, Bethlehem & the Greater Lehigh Valley. We have successfully had Lehigh & Northampton County Reckless Endangerment charges dismissed or downgraded.
In Pennsylvania, Recklessly Endangering Another Person, or REAP, is a misdemeanor and carries a sentence of up to 2 years in prison.
Recklessly endangering another person is often the result of charge loading and a person is very rarely charged solely with REAP. To prosecute someone for Reckless Endangerment, the District Attorney must be able to show an actual risk of danger. For example, if the charges are based upon the pointing of a gun at the alleged victim, the District Attorney must be able to prove that the firearm was loaded. Unfortunately, the risk, or chance of serious injury need not be high. For example, there is precedent that an HIV positive individual may commit REAP if he or she engages in sexual activity without first informing their partner of his or her HIV status. We have successfully defended a variety of Reckless Endangerment cases.
Our Criminal Defense Attorneys in Easton, Pennsylvania are here to help. Call now if you, or a loved one, are facing Reckless Endangerment charges.
Our Approach to Defending Reckless Endangerment Charges in the Lehigh Valley
Early Intervention & Aggressive Reckless Endangerment Defense
Early Retention of a Lehigh Valley Criminal Defense Attorney Can Be an Important Step in Defending Criminal Charges in Easton, Allentown & Bethlehem
When at all possible we want to be involved in a Lehigh or Northampton County Reckless Endangerment case as early as possible. As time passes, memories fade or distort and witnesses may become harder and harder to track down. Security camera footage in Allentown, Bethlehem or Easton may be overwritten and cell phone records may be destroyed. early contact may provide more time to preserve evidence and prepare. When at all possible, we prefer to be involved in a Reckless Endangerment case, prior to the Preliminary Hearing in order to maximize our ability to defend against the Reckless Endangerment charges.
Reckless Endangerment Law in Easton, Pennsylvania
Below you can find the Pennsylvania Reckless Endangerment Statute and some precedent favorable to the Defense of Reckless Endangerment Charges
Recklessly Endangering Another Person - 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2705
Recklessly Endangering Another Person - 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 2705
A person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if he recklessly engages in conduct which places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury.
Relevant Recklessly Endangering Another Person Case Law
Guns & Reckless Endangerment
Pointing an unloaded gun, without more, does not constitute recklessly endangering another person. Comm. v. Gouse, 287 Pa. Super. 120, 429 A.2d 1129 (1981); In re Maloney, 431 Pa. Super 321, 636 A.2d 671 (1994). Threatening to shoot a person is insufficient to establish REAP unless the government can establish that the gun is loaded. Comm. v. Smith, 301 Pa. Super. 142, 447 A.2d 282 (1982). Firing a round into a hillside or other barrier is insufficient to establish REAP where there is no evidence of people in or near the path of the projectile. Comm. v. Kamenar, 358 Pa. Super 62, 516 A.2d 770 (1986). Possessing a recently fired gun, without evidence that gun was fired at or near people, is insufficient to establish REAP. Comm. v. Smith, 301 Pa. Super. 142, 447 A.2d 282 (1982)
Ability to actually harm and Reckless Endangerment
Apparent ability to harm is insufficient without actual ability to harm. Comm. v. Gouse, 287 Pa. Super 120, 429 A.2d 1129 (1981); In re Maloney, 431 Pa. Super 321, 636 A.2d 671 (1994)
Criminal Court Process in Lehigh and Northampton Counties
A brief explanation of criminal-court hearings in Lehigh and Northampton Counties
Filing of Charges
A criminal case begins with the filing of the charging paperwork in the District Court. The District Court serves as the gatekeeper for the Court of Common Pleas and generally does not decide guilt or innocence nor does it impose sentences in misdemeanor and felony cases.
Under Pa.R.Crim.P. 509, a warrant is required when a felony or murder is charged and in specified circumstances such as reasonable grounds to believe the defendant will ignore a summons or poses a threat. A summons is ordinarily required when the most serious charge is a second-degree misdemeanor or a first-degree-misdemeanor DUI, absent those exceptions. Other cases—including many non-DUI first-degree misdemeanors—may fall within the issuing authority’s discretion. The actual charge, release status, service history, and case-specific facts control.
Preliminary Arraignment
A preliminary arraignment occurs after an arrest or warrant in cases that require it. The issuing authority advises the defendant of the charges and rights and addresses bail. A case initiated by summons may proceed without a separate preliminary arraignment, so the complaint, summons, warrant, and hearing notice control the next appearance.
Preliminary Hearing
At a preliminary hearing, the Commonwealth must present a prima facie case for charges to continue. The hearing is not a trial, and waiver can sometimes be part of a lawful strategy or agreement. No one should waive—or categorically refuse to waive—without understanding the evidence, bail posture, negotiations, and consequences in the particular case.
Formal Arraignment
Formal arraignment is a Court of Common Pleas proceeding at which the defendant is advised of the charges, rights, and important pretrial deadlines. The scheduling order and current county procedure control. A negotiated plea may sometimes be presented at or near that stage when permitted, but no agreement should be assumed and no filing deadline should be missed while discussions continue.
Pre-Trial Motions & Hearings
Proceedings after formal arraignment may include ARD or another diversion hearing, a habeas corpus challenge, a suppression or evidentiary hearing, a plea, a status event, or trial preparation. Each has a different legal standard and purpose. Suppression requires a supported constitutional or statutory basis; diversion remains discretionary; and a plea requires a knowing, voluntary, and intelligent decision after the terms and direct consequences are explained.
Criminal Trial
Whether a criminal trial is heard by a jury or by a judge depends on the grading, the right to a jury, any valid waiver, the court’s approval where required, and case-specific strategy. The decision should follow review of the charge, likely evidence, available defenses, and procedural rules—not a generalized assumption about emotion.
If the case proceeds as a jury trial, the court and counsel examine potential jurors under the applicable rules. Challenges for cause and the permitted number of peremptory challenges depend on the case and governing procedure. The process continues until a qualified jury is selected and sworn.
After a jury is chosen, the trial begins with opening statements.
Because the government has the burden of proof, the prosecutor is allowed to make his opening statement first. The defense will then have the option of making an opening statement or waiting until after the prosecution rests its case.
Defense lawyers usually opt to deliver opening statements immediately after the prosecution so that jurors can examine the government’s evidence under the defense’s theory of the case.
After the opening statement(s), each side has the opportunity to present its case.
The prosecution must present its case first. During this time the government presents evidence and elicits testimony from its witnesses. The defense is entitled to cross-examine each witness that the government calls. The prosecution must establish each charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
When the prosecution rests, the defense may seek a judgment of acquittal when supported. The defense may then present evidence, but it has no obligation to do so and the defendant has a constitutional right not to testify. If a motion is denied, counsel and the client make the remaining trial decisions under the applicable rules.
After the presentation of evidence concludes, the parties may make closing arguments. The order of argument and any rebuttal follow the applicable rules and the court’s directions.
The defendant has the right to testify and the right not to testify. If testimony is considered, counsel should explain the subjects and permissible impeachment that may arise under the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and the actual record. The decision is personal to the defendant and should not be reduced to a categorical statement that prior history will or will not be admitted.
While the prosecution must establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the defense has no obligation to present a case. When advantageous, the defense may rely solely upon raising a reasonable doubt in the prosecution’s case.
After the closing arguments, the judge will read specific instructions to the jury outlining the legal standards necessary to decide if the defendant is to be found guilty or not guilty. The jury then leaves the courtroom to deliberate the case.
If the jurors cannot reach a unanimous verdict, the court may declare a mistrial. A hung jury does not automatically dismiss the charges; subject to constitutional limits and later court rulings, the prosecution may seek a new trial or may decide not to retry the case.
Frequently asked questions
What is REAP?
Under 18 Pa.C.S. § 2705, REAP is recklessly engaging in conduct that "places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury." It is a second-degree misdemeanor carrying up to two years.
Does the risk have to be a near-miss?
No. The chance of serious injury need not be high, but the Commonwealth must prove an actual risk of danger. Apparent ability to harm is insufficient without actual ability to harm.
Is pointing an unloaded gun REAP?
Not by itself. The cases cited on the page say that pointing an unloaded gun, without more, does not constitute REAP, and that threatening to shoot someone is insufficient unless the government establishes that the gun was loaded. Firing into a hillside or other barrier was held insufficient where there was no evidence of people in or near the projectile's path; possessing a recently fired gun was likewise insufficient without evidence that it was fired at or near people.