Case ID: pa_499/html/0268-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. LARSEN, Justice, McDERMOTT, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

452 A.2d 1348
    COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Appellee, v. Douglas STIDHAM, Appellant.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Argued Oct. 22, 1982.
    Decided Dec. 23, 1982.
    
      Jay S. Gottlieb, Philadelphia (Court-appointed), for appellant.
    Robert B. Lawler, Chief, Appeals Div., Garold Tennis, Asst. Dist. Attys., for appellee.
    Before O’BRIEN, C.J., and ROBERTS, NIX, LARSEN, FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT and HUTCHINSON, JJ.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Judgments of Sentence imposed under Information Nos. 1591 (murder) and 1593 (conspiracy) are affirmed.

Judgment of Sentence entered under Information No. 1594 (robbery) is vacated. See, Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981).

LARSEN and McDERMOTT, JJ., filed dissenting opinions.

LARSEN, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent from the majority’s order of this Court vacating appellant’s sentence for robbery. In support thereof I cite my dissenting opinion in Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981).

McDERMOTT, Justice,

dissenting.

I dissent from the order of the Court insofar as it vacates appellant’s sentence for robbery on the authority of Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981). Appellant committed two separate and distinct offenses: robbery and murder of the second degree. I would overrule Tarver and hold that the lower court did not abuse its broad discretion in sentencing appellant for both crimes. See Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. at 331, 426 A.2d at 575 (dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Larsen). See also, Com monwealth v. McDuffie, 499 Pa. 325, 453 A.2d 331 (1982) (dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice McDermott).