J. S70011/18

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

v. :

:

LEROY THOMAS TAYLOR, : No. 2976 EDA 2017

:

 Appellant :

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, September 8, 2017,

in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County

Criminal Division at No. CP-51-CR-0002697-2016

BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., McLAUGHLIN, J., AND FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E. 

MEMORANDUM BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED JANUARY 04, 2019

Leroy Thomas Taylor appeals the September 8, 2017 judgment of 

sentence in which the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County 

sentenced him to an aggregate term of 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment for 

possession of a firearm while prohibited, carrying firearms without a license, 

carrying firearms in public in Philadelphia, and possession of an instrument 

of crime.1 After careful review, we affirm.

The facts, as recounted by the trial court, are as follows:

On February 7, 2016, neighbors Angel Rivera and 

[a]ppellant got into an altercation over Rivera’s 

girlfriend, who was pregnant with [a]ppellant’s child. 

The fight, which took place in public outside of 

2710 North Reese Street, soon became physical and 

[a]ppellant punched Rivera in the eye. Several other 

parties became involved and separated [a]ppellant 

 

1 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6105, 6106, 6108, and 907, respectively.
J. S70011/18

- 2 -

and Rivera. At this point [a]ppellant went into his 

home and came back outside. Rivera saw that 

[a]ppellant now had a gun in his waistband. Rivera’s 

daughter MariaAngely Rivera-Cruz also saw 

[a]ppellant with the gun. The police arrived a 

moment later and Rivera saw [a]ppellant put the gun 

on the ground behind the wheel of River’s car. The 

police then retrieved the gun from under the car and 

arrested [a]ppellant while around 10-15 of Rivera’s 

family members and neighbors observed.

Officer Anthony Nicoletti responded to a radio call for 

a black male with a black hoodie carrying a gun on 

the 2700-2800 block of Reese Street that night. 

When he arrived, he saw a group of around 

10-15 people trying to prevent [a]ppellant from 

leaving Reese Street by frantically tugging on his 

clothing and yelling, “Don’t let him leave. He threw 

the gun underneath the car.” Appellant was the only 

person present who matched the police radio 

description. Officer Nicoletti then secured 

[a]ppellant while his partner Officer Hoffman 

recovered the pistol from under Rivera’s car.

Officer Ronald Whiteman later investigated the pistol 

found at the scene and determined that it was 

loaded with nine cartridges of .45-caliber 

ammunition and that it was operable. Appellant was 

not licensed to carry a firearm on the date of this 

offense. Appellant was prohibited from possessing a 

handgun under the Firearms Act due to a previous 

conviction.

Trial court opinion, 12/12/17 at 2-3.

Following a non-jury trial, the trial court convicted appellant on 

April 28, 2017. On July 27, 2017, appellant filed a post-verdict motion for 

reconsideration of verdict. On September 8, 2017, the trial court denied the 

motion. Also on September 8, 2017, the trial court sentenced appellant. On 

September 9, 2017, appellant filed a notice of appeal. On November 14, 
J. S70011/18

- 3 -

2017, the trial court ordered appellant to file a statement of errors 

complained of on appeal, pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b). Appellant complied 

with the order on November 16, 2017. (See trial court opinion, 12/12/17 at 

1-2.) The trial court issued an opinion, pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) on 

December 12, 2017.

On appeal, appellant contends that there was insufficient evidence to 

convict him of the four crimes. (Appellant’s brief at 3.)

In reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, we view 

all evidence admitted at trial in the light most 

favorable to the Commonwealth, as verdict winner, 

to see whether there is sufficient evidence to enable 

[the fact-finder] to find every element of the crime 

beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard is equally 

applicable to cases where the evidence is 

circumstantial rather than direct so long as the 

combination of the evidence links the accused to a 

crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Although a 

conviction must be based on “more than mere 

suspicion or conjecture, the Commonwealth need not 

establish guilt to a mathematical certainty.”

Moreover, when reviewing the sufficiency of the 

evidence, the Court may not substitute its judgment 

for that of the fact finder; if the record contains 

support for the convictions, they may not be 

disturbed.

Commonwealth v. Stokes, 78 A.3d 644, 649 (Pa.Super. 2013), appeal 

denied, 89 A.3d 661 (Pa. 2014) (citations omitted).

Moreover, when applying the above test, the entire 

record must be evaluated and all evidence actually 

received must be considered. Finally, the finder of 

fact, while passing upon the credibility of the 

witnesses and the weight of the evidence produced, 

is free to believe all, part, or none of the evidence.
J. S70011/18

- 4 -

Commonwealth v. Estepp, 17 A.3d 939, 943-944 (Pa.Super. 2011) 

(citations omitted), appeal dismissed, 54 A.3d 22 (Pa. 2012).

Appellant specifically challenges the sufficiency of the evidence with 

respect to the three firearms convictions. 

Section 6105 of the Crimes Code, entitled, “Persons not to possess, 

use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms,” provides in pertinent 

part:

(a) Offense defined.--

(1) A person who has been convicted 

of an offense enumerated in 

subsection (b), within or without 

this Commonwealth, regardless of 

the length of sentence or whose 

conduct meets the criteria in 

subsection (c) shall not possess, 

use, control, sell, transfer or 

manufacture or obtain a license to 

possess, use, control, sell, transfer 

or manufacture a firearm in this 

Commonwealth.

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6105(a)(1).

Section 6106 of the Crimes Code, entitled “Firearms not to be carried 

without a license,” provides in pertinent part:

(a) Offense defined.--

(1) Except as provided in paragraph 

(2), any person who carries a 

firearm in any vehicle or any 

person who carries a firearm 

concealed on or about his person, 

except in his place of abode or 
J. S70011/18

- 5 -

fixed place of business, without a 

valid and lawfully issued license 

under this chapter commits a 

felony of the third degree.

(2) A person who is otherwise eligible 

to possess a valid license under 

this chapter but carries a firearm in 

any vehicle or any person who 

carries a firearm concealed on or 

about his person, except in his 

place of abode or fixed place of 

business, without a valid and 

lawfully issued license and has not 

committed any other criminal 

violation commits a misdemeanor 

of the first degree.

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6106(a)(1-2).

Section 6108 of the Crimes Code, entitled, “Carrying firearms on public 

streets or public property in Philadelphia,” provides in pertinent part:

No person shall carry a firearm, rifle or shotgun at 

any time upon the public streets or upon any public 

property in a city of the first class unless:

(1) such person is licensed to carry a 

firearm; or

(2) such person is exempt from licensing 

under section 6106(b) of this title 

(relating to firearms not to be carried 

without a license).

18 Pa.C.S.A. § 6108.

For all of these crimes, the Commonwealth must establish that 

appellant carried or possessed a firearm. See In re R.N., 951 A.2d 363, 
J. S70011/18

- 6 -

369-370 (Pa.Super. 2008). Appellant does not challenge the sufficiency of 

any of the other elements of these crimes.

Here, Angel Rivera (“Rivera”) testified that after the initial altercation,

appellant returned to the scene with a gun in his waistband. (Notes of 

testimony, 4/28/17 at 10.) Rivera also testified that he observed appellant 

putting the gun on the ground behind the wheel of Rivera’s vehicle. (Id.) 

Rivera’s daughter, MariaAngely Rivera-Cruz, testified that she saw appellant 

with a gun. (Id. at 35.)

In addition, Officer Anthony Nicoletti (“Officer Nicoletti”) of the City of 

Philadelphia Police Department testified that when he arrived on the scene of 

the altercation, he saw a group of 10 to 15 people tugging on appellant’s 

clothing and yelling, “Don’t let him leave. He threw the gun underneath the 

car.” (Id. at 22.) Officer Nicoletti also testified that his partner,

Officer Hoffman, recovered a firearm from under Rivera’s car. (Id. at 25.)

This court does not agree with appellant’s assertion that the evidence 

was insufficient. Two eyewitnesses saw appellant with a firearm. Rivera 

saw him put the gun under the car or by the wheel. Others informed 

Officer Nicoletti that appellant had placed the gun under the vehicle, which is 
J. S70011/18

- 7 -

where the firearm was recovered. Appellant’s contention that the 

Commonwealth failed to present sufficient evidence is without merit.2

Judgment of sentence affirmed. 

Judgment Entered.

Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.

Prothonotary

Date: 1/4/19

 

2 Appellant argues that the Commonwealth failed to prove that he had 

constructive possession of the firearm. However, when the Commonwealth 

is able to prove actual possession, it does not have to prove constructive 

possession. Commonwealth v. Macolino, 469 A.2d 132, 134 (Pa. 1983).