Pa. Supreme Court Weighs Joint-Use Defense in Overdose Death Cases

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is weighing whether people who pool money and use drugs together should have a legal defense against the state's harshest overdose-homicide statute — a charge filed more than 680 times in Pennsylvania from 2021 through 2025 and carrying a maximum sentence of 40 years in prison.

The consolidated appeals, argued earlier this year with decisions still pending as of early September, ask the justices to decide what happens when people "jointly and constructively acquire and use drugs" — and whether that reality should produce an acquittal or at least a jury instruction on joint possession in drug delivery resulting in death prosecutions.

Two York County cases at the center

Both cases come out of York County, a consistent leader in these prosecutions, and both were originally tried when the county's district attorney was Dave Sunday, now Pennsylvania's attorney general.

Jerrod Scott is serving 9 to 18 years in connection with the 2019 death of Zack Savage. The defense says Scott, Savage and a third person pooled resources to buy drugs — Savage had money and a car, Scott had dealer connections. At one point that night, Savage revived Scott with an overdose-reversal drug. Savage later used drugs himself, collapsed and died.

Charles Cassell III, now 59, received 23.5 to 47 years for drug delivery resulting in death, third-degree murder and other convictions tied to the 2020 death of Angelique Smith, 23, who fatally overdosed on fentanyl a day after leaving a drug rehabilitation facility. Cassell performed CPR on Smith, then drove around — at times near a hospital and a fire station stocked with naloxone — for roughly three hours before calling 911, afraid, his attorney said, of her outstanding warrants. Justice David Wecht called the case "definitely overcharged and definitely oversentenced" during arguments, then added: "But I don't see how we can do anything about it."

What counts as a "delivery"

The legal fight turns on a single word. Pennsylvania prosecutors argue that any transfer of a controlled substance — with a narrow exception for small amounts of marijuana — constitutes delivery. "The legislature chose not to leave a loophole for those acting as agents or co-purchasers of other drugs," James Zamkotowicz, a chief deputy prosecutor in York County, wrote in filings.

Defense attorney Anthony Tambourino counters that the statute "was not meant to criminalize every drug handoff among co-users." During arguments he put it plainly: "You can't deliver something to someone if they already possess it." Justice Christine Donohue appeared unpersuaded, offering that handing a slice of pizza to a colleague is still a transfer: "Should there be an exception for joint use? Maybe, but it's not here as I see it."

The question has divided lower courts. In 2023, the state Superior Court upheld dismissal of a drug delivery resulting in death charge in a Westmoreland County case — but declined a request to make that ruling precedent-setting. The same court ruled against both Cassell and Scott before the Supreme Court agreed to hear their appeals.

The 911 problem

Critics of these prosecutions say the stakes extend beyond sentencing. Fear of a decades-long prison term, they argue, makes people hesitate before calling for help when someone overdoses beside them.

Kate McLean, a criminal justice professor at Penn State Beaver, studied that behavior among people in an outpatient drug counseling program in southwestern Pennsylvania, in research published in the Journal of Crime and Justice in 2018. Many respondents, she found, cited the threat of homicide prosecution as a reason to handle an overdose themselves or simply flee. She told Spotlight PA she has come to believe drug-induced homicide laws "just make everyone less safe."

Pennsylvania's Good Samaritan statute shields people who seek emergency help from some drug charges — but explicitly not from drug-induced homicide. As of 2024, 31 states had a specific drug-induced homicide law, and only six offered an affirmative defense for people who made good-faith efforts to get emergency assistance. Pennsylvania was not among them.

C. Melissa Owen, president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said luck often decides which co-user dies and which one gets prosecuted. "Pennsylvania's current law only adds to that tragedy when co-users face decades in prison," she said.

Prosecutors defend the approach

York County District Attorney Tim Barker said the evidence in both cases goes "well beyond any characterization of a minimal 'sharing' of drugs," and that his office looks forward to a ruling that "will not only be binding on these matters, but also provide future precedential guidance in this critical area of criminal law." He described the office as seeking "rehabilitation and diversion where appropriate" while pursuing "accountability for criminal conduct that harms victims."

In Smith's death, Zamkotowicz said she "had no money, no mode of transportation, and no cell phone," and that Cassell "suggested using heroin that day without any prompting from the victim." A spokesperson for Attorney General Sunday, asked about Wecht's criticism, said a jury "deliberated over the facts and agreed on a verdict."

The Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association called the issue important without commenting on specifics. Families of the dead remain divided over whether the prosecutions deliver accountability or pile loss on top of loss — a split that now sits with seven justices in Harrisburg.

Anyone struggling with substance use can reach the SAMHSA National Helpline at 1-800-662-4357, free and confidential, 24/7. Treatment options for opioid use disorder are available nationwide.