Macik v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole

In Macik v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 106 Pa. Commw. 352, 526 A.2d 460 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987), a parolee was found in violation of his parole and during a search of his home, a utility knife was found in its sheath. The parolee testified that he used it to install insulation around the windows of his home. The Board found him in violation of condition 5B of his parole for possessing a knife. The parolee appealed, arguing that he had a legitimate purpose for possessing the knife which was not a weapon. The Board relied upon Michael v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 85 Pa. Commw. 173, 481 A.2d 711 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984), where the parolee was arrested for leaving the scene of an accident at which time he was found possessing a knife. The parolee argued that it had a utilitarian purpose and was not a weapon per se. In Michael, we held that in the absence of a definition of the word "weapon," under 37 Pa. Code 63.4(5)(ii), the Board was not wrong in finding that the knife was a weapon for parole violation purposes because there was no proof that the parolee was using the knife for a legitimate purpose. In Macik, we ultimately determined that the parolee testified that he used the knife to install insulation which was a legitimate purpose but the Board did not make a specific finding on that testimony. "If it were otherwise, a parolee would be in violation of his parole every time he picked up a steak knife to eat dinner, or a sickle to cut weeds. We cannot believe that even under the Board's broadest definition of the term 'weapon' it was meant to include such a result." Macik, 106 Pa. Commw. at 355. The Court then vacated and remanded the matter to the Board for further findings on the issue of whether the parolee's knife was a weapon.