Case ID: pa-super_250/html/0626-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

379 A.2d 603
    Commonwealth, Appellant, v. Pope.
    Submitted December 16,1975.
    Carolyn Engel Temin, Assistant District Attorney, and F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellant;
    Mike Hanford, Assistant Defender, and Benjamin Lerner, Defender, for appellee.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The order of the lower court sustaining appellee’s post-trial motion challenging the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the Commonwealth on the issue of appellee’s lack of a license is reversed for the reasons stated in Commonwealth v. Poindexter, 248 Pa.Superior Ct. 564, 375 A.2d 384 (1977). The record is remanded for consideration of remaining post-trial motions, if any. If the lower court decides that remaining post-trial motions are without merit, it shall proceed to judgment of sentence.

HOFFMAN and SPAETH, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the concurring and dissenting opinion of HOFFMAN, J., in Commonwealth v. Poindexter, 248 Pa.Superior Ct. 564, 375 A.2d 384 (1977).