Case ID: pa-super_213/html/0248-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam, Hoffman, J.:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Commonwealth v. Duff, Appellant.
    Argued September 10, 1968.
    Before Weight, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Hannum, JJ.
    
      David N. Brook, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.
    
      Richard A. Devlin, Assistant District Attorney, with him Henry T. Crocker, Assistant District Attorney, Parker H. Wilson, First Assistant District Attorney, and Milton O. Moss, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    November 14, 1968:
   Opinion

Per Curiam,

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Dissenting Opinion by

Hoffman, J.:

On April 5, 1968, appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 1 y2 nor more than 6 years.

Just before imposing sentence, the court said:

“While I am not taking into account the charges that are presently lodged against them (the defendants), I can’t close my eyes to the fact that there are outstanding charges.” (N.T. 17)

The ambiguity of this statement is apparent. Inferentially, there is reason to believe that the court did give some weight to the outstanding indictments. This was clearly error.

Accordingly, I would remand this case to the court below for resentencing.