J

### -A05025-19
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE 

### SUPERIOR COURT 

### I.O.P. 

### 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
LEVERETT EDWARD JOHNSON 

### Appellant : No. 175 WDA 2018 Appeal

### from theJudgment of SentenceJanuary 20, 2016 In the 

### Courtof Common Pleas of

### AlleghenyCountyCriminal Division at No(s): 

### CP-02-CR-0013866-2014, CP-02-CR-0013867-2014, CP-02-CR-0014229-2014, CP-02-CR-0014230-2014, CP-02-CR-0014231-2014, CP-02-CR-0014233-2014, CP-02-CR-0014234-2014, CP-02-CR-0015392-2014, CP-02-CR-0015534-2014, CP-02-CR-0016430-2014, CP-02-CR-0016687-2014
BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J.E., SHOGAN, J., and MURRAY, J. MEMORANDUM BY SHOGAN, J.: 

### FILEDJUNE

### 03, 2019 Appellant, Leverett Edward Johnson, appeals 

### nunc pro tunc from the 

### judgment of sentence imposed on January 20, 2016 in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas. This case involves a procedural morass related to the sheer number of docket numbers and the 

### attendant scrivener 

### error in record keeping and by

### Appellant. We 

### affirm in 

### part and 

### vacate in part. The 

### trial court summarizedthe procedural 

### history as

### follows: On'October 21, 2015, Mr. 

### LeverettJohnson 

### [("Appellant")], plead 

### guilty at criminal 

### complaint numbers 

### 2014-13867; 14233; and 14251, to 

### three (3) counts of 

### robbery-threatened seriousJ

### -A05025-19 bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([(a)(1)](ii);[1] one (1) count of

### theft by 

### unlawful taking under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3921([a]); one (1) count of aggravated assault under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 2702([a)(1)]; and one 

### (1) count of 

### criminal mischief under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3304([a])3.

1 For the purposes 

### of

### clarity, it should be noted 

### that [Appellant] was charged at eighteen

### different criminal complaint 

### numbers[, 

### o]nly eleven 

### of which are contained in 

### this appeal.[2] However, as 

### this was a crime 

### "spree" it is not possibleto leave the additional cases unaddressed 

### for purposes of a 

### complete recounting of events. On the same date 

### this 

### [c]ourt began a 

### stipulated non

### -jury trial regardingthe remaining cases. At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-13866, this 

### [c]ourtfound 

### [Appellant] 

### guiltyofone 

### (1)count of 

### robbery-threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal 

### complaint number2014- 14227, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery-threatened serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14228, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one 

### (1) count of robbery- 

### threatened serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14229,

1 We note 

### that subsections (i) and 

### (ii) are 

### consistently mischaracterized 

### throughout documents in 

### the cases as 

### (I) and 

### (II). The charging 

### documents, the 

### trial court, and 

### Appellant also 

### refer to subsection (a) of the charged 

### statutes as subsection (A). These

### scrivener errors add to the confusion in the cases but do not 

### affect the resolution of the issues.

2 As noted by the 

### trial court, Appellant's notice 

### of appeal lists eleven 

### docket numbers including, 

### interalia,Allegheny County DocketNumbers 

### 2014-13867 and 

### 2014-14233. However, 

### Appellant failsto make any

### argument in his 

### brief related to these two cases to which he pled 

### guilty. Because 

### Appellant has abandoned any 

### argument related to these docket numbers, anyclaim related to 

### them is waived. 

### See 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Woodard, 129 A.3d 

### 480, 509 (Pa. 

### 2015) (holding 

### that"where an appellate 

### brieffailsto

... develop an issue in any

### other meaningful fashion capable 

### of review,

### that claim is waived. 

### It is not the obligation of an appellate 

### court to 

### formulate [an] appellant's arguments for 

### him.") (citing 

### Wirth v. 

### Commonwealth, 95 A.3d 822, 837 (Pa. 

### 2014)). 

## -2J

### -A05025-19
this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of two 

### (2) countsof robbery- 

### threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). The proceedings were then continued and resumed on November 3, 2015. On 

### November 3, 2015, at 

### criminalcomplaint number2014- 14230, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] 

### guilty of one 

### (1) count of robbery-threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), as well as one 

### (1) count of

### theft by 

### unlawful taking under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3921([a]). At criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14231, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty oftwo (2) counts 

### of robbery

### -threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), aswell as one (1) count of 

### theft by 

### unlawful taking under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3921([a]). At 

### criminal complaint number 2014-14232, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery- 

### threatened serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14234, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery- 

### threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3071([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14235, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery- 

### threatened serious 

### bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), as well as one 

### (1) count of 

### theft by 

### unlawful taking under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3921([a]). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14236, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of two (2) counts of 

### robbery-threatened immediate serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii). At 

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-14248, this 

### [c]ourtfound 

### [Appellant] 

### guiltyofrobberyunder 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](iv). At criminal 

### complaint 2014-15392, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery- 

### threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), as well as one 

### (1) count of 

### terroristic threats under 18 [Pa.C.S.] § 

### 2706([a)(1)]. At

### criminal complaint number 

### 2014-15534, this 

### [c]ourtfound 

### [Appellant] 

### guilty ofone 

### (1) count of 

### robbery-threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. §

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), aswell as one 

### (1)countof

### terroristic threats under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 2706([a)(1)]. Atcriminal 

### complaint number 

### 2014-16430, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] 

### guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery-threatened infliction of serious bodily 

### injury under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](ii), aswell as one (1) count of 

### terroristic threats under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 2706([a)(1)]. Finally, at

- 3 -J

### -A05025-19
criminal 

### complaint number 2014-16687, this 

### [c]ourt found 

### [Appellant] 

### guilty of one (1) count of 

### robbery-take property by force under 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701([a)(1)](v). Sentencing was waived 

### until January 20, 2016. On 

### January 20, 2016, 

### this 

### [c]ourt sentenced 

### [Appellant] to an 

### aggregate sentence 

### often (10) to 

### twenty (20) years pursuant to a 

### mandatory nnininnunn.[3] On 

### September 15,2016, 

### [Appellant] filed a 

### pro se Post

### -Conviction ReliefAct [("PCRA")] Petition 

### with this 

### [c]ourt. On 

### September 19, 2016, 

### this 

### [c]ourt appointed counsel to 

### represent 

### [Appellant] in his PCRA 

### [petition]. On June 26, 2017, counsel filed an Amended Petition 

### for Collateral Relief

### withthis 

### [c]ourt, requesting

### nuncpro

### tunc reinstatementof 

### [Appellant's] rights to a 

### direct appeal. On July 26, 2017, the Commonwealth filed an Answer to 

### [Appellant's] Amended PCRA Petition and consented to the 

### reinstatement of 

### [Appellant's] right to a 

### direct appeal. On 

### August 2, 2017, this 

### [c]ourt reinstated 

### [Appellant's] appellate rights. On 

### September 7, 2017, 

### [Appellant] filed a Post-Sentence Motion 

### with this 

### [c]ourt. On October 13, 2017, the Commonwealth filed a Response to 

### [Appellant's] Post-Sentence Motion. On January 3, 

### 2018, this 

### [c]ourt denied 

### [Appellant's] Post-Sentence Motion in its 

### entirety. On February 1, 2018, 

### [Appellant] filed a Notice 

### ofAppeal to 

### Superior Court. On February 16, 2018, 

### this 

### [c]ourt ordered 

### that [Appellant] filed 

### [sic] a [Pa.R.A.P.] 

### 1925(b) Concise 

### Statement of Errors Complained of onAppeal. On March 13, 2018, 

### this 

### [c]ourt granted 

### [Appellant] an Extension 

### of Time to File Concise 

### Statement of Errors Complained of on Appeal. 

### [Appellant] 

### timely filed his [Rule] 

### 1925(b) Concise 

### Statement of Errors Complained of onAppeal on April 24, 2018. Trial 

### Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 

### 1-4. In reciting its

### summary ofthefacts, the

### trial court noted 

### that beginning
on

### September22, 2014, and ending onOctober6, 

### 2014,Appellant

### committed

3 The 

### mandatory minimum sentences were due to 

### prior convictions. N.T. 

### (Sentencing), 

### 1/20/16, at 

### 17-18. 

## -4J

### -A05025-19 eighteen robberies in 

### various areas 

### of Pittsburgh. Trial Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at4. Whilewe will not repeat 

### them here, the 

### trial courtset

### forth a 

### summary of the facts of each of

### the robberies drawn 

### "from the 

### affidavits of probable 

### cause[,] which were 

### stipulated to as the factual basis 

### for each case, 

### [and] which should be 

### submitted to 

### this Superior Court as 

### partofthe official 

### record." See

### id. at

### 4-11. Appellant raises thefollowing two issues on appeal: I. Was the evidence 

### insufficient as a 

### matter of law to sustain the convictions under 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701([a])(1)(i)-robberyinfliction of serious bodily 

### injury at CC 

### #2014H14229, CC 

### #2014[-]13866, CC # 

### 2014[-]13887,[4] CC

### #2014[-]15392, CC 

### #2014H14231, CC 

### #2014H14230, CC 

### #2014[- ]16430, CC 

### #2014H14234, and CC 

### #2014H15534, insofar as the Commonwealth did not prove beyond a reasonable 

### doubt 

### that [Appellant], in the course 

### of 

### committing a 

### theft, inflicted bodily 

### injury upon 

### another in those cases? 

### II. Was the evidence 

### insufficient as a 

### matter of law to sustain the conviction at CC 

### #2014[-]16687 under 18 Pa.C.S.§ 

### 3701([a])(1)([v]) (robbery-takes 

### propertyfrom another by force) insofar asthe Commonwealth failed to prove beyond

4 Our review ofthe record reveals 

### that there were no charges 

### identified as related to Docket Number CC 

### 2014-13887 in 

### this case, nor was 

### this docket number included in 

### Appellant's notice 

### of appeal. 

### Indeed, the 

### trial court pointed 

### out 

### that this docket number, which also was included in 

### Appellant's Pa.R.A.P. 

### 1925(b) statement, "does not correspond to any of 

### [Appellant's] cases

. . . 

### ." Trial 

### CourtOpinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 12 n.2. Despitethe

### trialcourt's notification of

### this apparent 

### error, Appellantfailed to 

### correct reference to it in his 

### Statement of the Questions 

### Involved in his 

### appellate brief, 

### thereby perpetuating the 

### errorand 

### continuing confusion in 

### this case. Moreover, in the 

### argument section of 

### Appellant's brief, 

### Appellant fails to 

### present any claim regarding such

### docket number. 

### It is

### likely

### thatAppellant has made a 

### scrivener error in both his Rule 

### 1925(b) 

### statement and his 

### Statement of Questions 

### Involved pursuant to Pa.R.A.P. 2116.

- 5 -J

### -A05025-19

a reasonable 

### doubt 

### that any 

### property was taken or removed, or

### that [Appellant] used anyforce, and

### therefore, did not establish the elements required to establish an offense 

### pursuant to Section 

### 3701([a])(1)(v)? Appellant's Briefat 4 

### (unnecessarycapitalization removed). Because a 

### determination of 

### evidentiary sufficiency presents a question of law, our standard of review is de novo and our scope 

### of review is plenary. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Sanchez, 36 A.3d 24, 37 (Pa. 

### 2011). In reviewing the 

### sufficiencyofthe evidence,we 

### mustdetermine

### whethertheevidence

### admitted at

### trial and all reasonable inferencesdrawn

### therefrom, viewed inthe 

### light most favorable to the Commonwealth as 

### verdict winner, were 

### sufficient to prove 

### every element of

### the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. 

### Commonwealth

v. 

### Von 

### Evans, 163 A.3d 980, 983 (Pa. Super. 

### 2017). 

### "[T]he facts and circumstances established by the Commonwealth need not preclude 

### every possibility of 

### innocence." 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Colon

### -Plaza, 136 A.3d 521, 

### 525-526 (Pa. Super. 

### 2016) (quoting 

### Commonwealth v.

### Robertson-Dewar, 829A.2d 1207, 1211 (Pa. Super. 

### 2003)). 

### It is

### within the provinceofthefact- 

### finderto 

### determinethe

### weight to be accordedto each

### witness's

### testimonyand to believe all, 

### part, ornone 

### oftheevidence. 

### Commonwealthv. 

### Tejada, 107 A.3d 788, 

### 792-793 (Pa. Super. 

### 2015). The 

### Commonwealth may sustain its burden 

### of proving every element of the crime by means 

### of 

### wholly circumstantial evidence. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Mucci, 143 A.3d 399, 409 (Pa. Super. 

### 2016). Moreover, as an 

### appellate court, we may not re-weigh the


## -6J

### -A05025-19
evidence and 

### substitute our 

### judgment for 

### that of the 

### fact-finder. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Rogal, 120 A.3d 

### 994,1001 (Pa. Super. 

### 2015). In his 

### first issue, 

### Appellant asserts

### that theevidencewas 

### insufficient as

a 

### matter of law to sustain his 

### convictions under 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i)- robbery-inflictionofserious bodily 

### injury, at

### eight designated docket numbers. 

### Appellant's Briefat 

### 24-26. In 

### particular, Appellant avers 

### that there "was no evidence presented 

### that any of the 

### victims in the cases at issue suffered serious bodily 

### injury." Appellant's Brief at 29. This is 

### the sole 

### argument Appellant proffers 

### for this issue. For the reasons 

### that follow, we will not addressthesubstance ofthis claim of 

### insufficient evidence because

### Appellant
was not convicted 

### ofsubsection 

### 3701(a)(1)(i). Appellant does not 

### clarify the basis 

### for his 

### argument, suggesting, 

### without clearly

### substantiating, 

### that

### "[t]he [trial] court's

### verdict in these cases appears on page 1 ofeach Criminal 

### Information and referencesonlytheCount numbers which appear on the same 

### page." Appellant's Brief at 9 n.2. The 

### Commonwealth suggests

### thatAppellant rests his

### argument "onthe

### front page docket sheet ofthe 

### information[s], which 

### list[] 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i)

as the charge, 

### rather than recognizing

### that charging language set

### forth in the 

### information encompasses both 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) and 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(ii). Commonwealth's Briefat 19.



## -7J

### -A05025-19
In the eights 

### correctly referenced cases set 

### forth in Issue One, Docket Numbers 

### 2014-13866, 2014-14229, 2014-14230, 2014-14231, 2014-14234, 2014-15392, 2014-15534, and 

### 2014-16430, Appellant was charged, 

### inter alia, 

### with robbery,which provides, in 

### pertinent part, as

### follows: § 

### 3701. Robbery 

### (a) Offense

## defined.- (1) A person is 

### guilty of 

### robbery if, in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft, he: (i) 

### inflicts serious bodily 

### injury upon 

### another; (ii) threatens another with or 

### intentionally puts him in 

### fear of 

### immediate serious bodily 

### injury; 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i)-(ii). A review ofthe charging documents reveals 

### thatAppellantwas charged 

### with robbery-serious bodily 

### injury, "inviolation of 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) 

### or 

## (ii) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code." 

### Informations in referenced docket numbers (emphasis added). Both the 

### trial court and the Commonwealth agree 

### with Appellant 

### that the 

### victims in these
cases did not 

### suffer serious bodily 

### injury. Trial 

### Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 13; 

### Commonwealth's Brief at 18. However, both the 

### trial court and the Commonwealth make clear 

### that Appellant was convicted of 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(ii), notsubsection 

### (i). The

### trial court stated as 

### follows: A review of the record indicates 

### that at every criminal complaint number complainedofunder 

### this prong of 

### [Appellant's]

5 The 

### robberysection charged in the ninth case, Docket Number

### 2014-16687, is 

### different, and 

### that case is addressed in

### Appellant's second issue.

- 8 -J

### -A05025-19 argument, the 

### notation "Count 99,999: 18 § 3701 §§ A 

# IIRobbery-Threat Immed Ser 

### Injury (F1) Offense Disposition: Charge Changed" can be found. [There was] 

### clearly a clerical 

### error, where the record was changed 

### from the 

### correct charge to the incorrect charge. 

### Additionally, a review of the Sentencing Guidelines in each case reflects the accurate convictions of Robbery

### -Threatens Serious Bodily 

### Injury. This Court does not profess to be 

### perfect, however, it is not so 

### incompetent as to find 

### [Appellant] 

### guilty in nine 

### (9) cases ofan offense ofwhich 

### there is 

### clearly no proof. In an age of 

### computer technology where the 

### paperworkof

### justice has been replaced 

### with keystrokesand 

### "drop- down 

### menus" the potential 

### for error is 

### greatly increased. However, 

### this is not an 

### error for which 

### [Appellant] is 

### entitled to any 

### reliefother than the correction of his 

### paperwork. 

### [Appellant] is 

### correct in 

### that he never inflicted any serious bodily 

### injury. He did however,

### threatentodosowhen he 

### either brandished the replica 

### firearm or behaved as if he had a weapon in his

### sweatshirt. In 

### multiple robberies he

### threatened to shoot his 

### victims if

### they did not 

### complywith his demands more quickly. Trial Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 

### 13-14 (emphasis added). We have 

### carefully reviewed the 

### certified records. The 

### Informations in the appealed cases 

### identify the robbery counts 

### consistently as, 

### for example, the 

### Information at Docket Number 

### 2014-14229, which is 

### representative of all ofthe 

### relevant 

### Informations, and states: Count 1 ROBBERY-SERIOUS BODILY INJURY Felony 1 The 

### actor in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft, either inflicted serious bodily 

### injury upon 

### [the

### victim],

### threatened

### that person or persons 

### with, 

### or put 

### that person or persons 

### in 

### fear of immediate serious 

### bodily 

### injury, in 

### violation of Section 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) or 

## (ii) of 

### the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 

### §3701(a)(1)(i) 

### or

## (ii). Count 2 ROBBERY-SERIOUS BODILY INJURY Felony 1 The 

### actor in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft, either inflicted serious bodily 

### injury upon 

### [the

### victim],

### threatened

### that person

- 9 -J

### -A05025-19

or persons 

### with, 

### or put 

### that person or persons 

### in 

### fear of immediate serious 

### bodily 

### injury, in 

### violation of Section 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) or 

### (ii) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act 

### of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa. C.S. 

### §3701(a)(1)(i) 

### or

## (ii). Information at Docket Number 

### 2014-14229, 

### 12/10/14, at 1 (emphases added). The 

### description of the acts in the 

### complaint at 

### that Docket Number states as 

### follows: 18 [Pa.C.S. §] 

### 3701[(a)(1)(ii)] ROBBERY F1 2 COUNTS The actor, in the course of

### committing a 

### theft,

### threatened another person 

### with, 

### or 

### intentionally put

### that person

. . . 

### in 

### fear

### ofimmediateserious

### bodily

### injury, in 

### violation of 18 Pa. C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(ii). The actor, in the course of

### committing a 

### theft,

### threatened another person 

### with, 

### or 

### intentionally put

### that person

. . . 

### in 

### fear

### ofimmediateserious

### bodily

### injury, in 

### violation of 18 Pa. C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(ii). Criminal 

### Complaint at Docket Number

### 2014-14229, 

### 10/13/14, at 2. As noted, 

### following Appellant's 

### guilty pleas in 

### three of the cases, the 

### trial courtconducted a 

### stipulated bench

### trial. N.T., 

### 10/21/15, at31, 36. Using Docket Number 

### 2014-14229 as an 

### example, the 

### trial court found 

### Appellant 

### "guilty of Counts One and 

### Two." 

### Id. at 42. The 

### verdict was recorded as 

### follows: And now 10-21 2015 

### after hearing a 

### stipulated non

### -jury in open 

### court, 

### [Appellant] is Adjudged Guilty of counts 1-2. By the Court

- 10 -J

### -A05025-19
TheGuideline Sentence Form 

### for Docket Number 

### 2014-14229 identifies theoffense as 

### "Robbery-threatens SBI[6]" as provided in 

### "18 [Pa.C.S. §] 3701 

## AM." At sentencing on Docket Number 

### 2014-14229, the 

### trial court stated: 

### [W]ith regard to Count 1, the 

### [c]ourt imposes a sentence of no lessthan seven years and no more 

### than 14years. Said sentence will run 

### concurrentwith all 

### other sentences imposed. N.T. 

### (Sentencing), 

### 1/20/16, at 34. The Order of Sentence provides, in 

### pertinent part: AND NOW, this 20th day of January, 2016, 

### [Appellant] having been convicted in the above

### -captioned case is hereby sentenced by 

### this 

### [c]ourt as follows. 

### [Appellant] is to pay all applicable fees and costs unless 

### otherwise noted below: Count 1-18 § 3701 §§ 

### AlI-Robbery-Inflict Serious Bodily 

### Injury (F1) To be confined 

### for a 

### minimum period 

### of 7 Year(s) and a 

### maximum period 

### of 14 Year(s) at SCI Camp Hill. The 

### following conditions are imposed: Comply-DNA: 

### [Appellant] is to 

### comply with DNA 

### registration. Contact-No Contact: 

### [Appellant] isto have no

### contact with

### victim(s) and 

### establishment. Restitution: [Appellant] is to pay 

### restitution in the 

### amount of$400.00 to see 

### orderfiled. Other: 

### [Appellant] is NOT RRRI ELIGIBLE. This sentence shall commence on 

### 01/20/2016. Count 

### 2-18 § 3701 §§ 

### AlI-Robbery-Inflict Serious Bodily 

### Injury (F1)

6 SBI is serious bodily 

### injury.J

### -A05025-19

A 

### determination of

### guiltywithout

### further penalty. Count 

### 99,999-18 § 3701 §§

### A1II - Robbery

### -Threat Immed Ser 

### Injury (F1) Offense Disposition: 

### Charge Changed Count 

### 99,999-18 § 3701 §§ 

### A1II-Robbery-Threat Immed Ser 

### Injury (F1) Offense Disposition: 

### Charge Changed Order of Sentence, 

### 1/20/16, at 1 (emphases added). The 

### paperwork in the 

### other appealed cases is 

### consistent. Ourcareful review ofthe record reveals

### thatAppellantwas charged 

### with robbery in 

### violation of subsection 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) or 

### (ii). The language 

### of the 

### Informations put 

### Appellant on notice 

### that he was charged 

### with inflicting serious bodily 

### injury 

### or 

### threatening bodily 

### injury. 

### It is beyond cavil 

### that Appellant knew 

### the facts 

### surrounding the offenses charged. Bills 

### of 

### information are governed by the Pennsylvania Rules 

### of Criminal Procedure, which 

### require

### thatthey include a 

### "plain and concise

### statement ofthe essential elements of the offense 

### substantially the same as or cognate to the offense alleged in the 

### complaint[.]" Pa.R.Crim.P. 

### 560(6)(5); see 

### also 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Badman, 580 A.2d 1367, 1371 (Pa. Super. 1990) 

### (stating 

### that 

### "[t]he information should be read in a common sense 

### manner, 

### rather than being construed in an 

### overly technical sense."). 

### Importantly, Pa.R.Crim.P. 560(C) provides 

### that the 

### Information "shall contain the official
or 

### customarycitation ofthe 

### statute and section 

### thereof, or 

### other provision of

- 12 -J

### -A05025-19
law 

### thatthe 

### defendant is alleged 

### therein to have

### violated; 

### buttheomission 

### ofor

### error in 

### such 

### citation shall 

### not 

### affect the

### validity orsufficiency ofthe

### information." Pa.R.Crim.P. 560(C) (emphasis added). "The purpose ofthe 

### information is to advise the accused 

### ofthe allegations and the crimes charged,to give

### sufficientnoticetoallowthe

### opportunityto prepare adefense, and to define the issues

### for

### trial." Commonwealth v. 

### Kisner, 736A.2d 672, 674 (Pa. Super. 

### 1999). We agree 

### with the 

### trial court 

### that a claim regarding 

### the sufficiency of the evidence 

### under 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(i) is 

### irrelevant in 

### this case because 

### Appellant was 

### convicted, instead, of 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(ii). "A 

### trial court has 

### inherent, common-law 

### authorityto 

### correct'clear clerical

### errors' in its

### orders." 

### Commonwealthv. 

### Thompson, 106A.3d 742, 766 (Pa. Super. 2014) 

### (citation 

### omitted). Moreover, 

### this 

### authority"exists even 

### after the 30

## - day 

### time limitation for the 

### modification of orders 

### expires." 

### Id. (citing 42 Pa.C.S. § 

### 5505). The

### Thompson Court 

### reiterated

### that

### "[w]e have 

### previously concluded 

### that a 

### 'clear clerical 

### error' exists on 

### the face 

### ofthe record 

### 'when a 

### trial court's intentions are 

### clearly and 

### unambiguously declared during 

### the sentencing 

### hearing." 

### Id. (quoting 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Borrin, 12A.3d 

### 466, 473 (Pa. Super. 

### 2011) (en banc) (citing 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Holmes, 933 A.2d 57, 67 (Pa. 

### 2007) ("concluding the 

### limited, inherentjudicial powerofthe 

### court to 

### correct patent errors arise in cases 

### 'involving clear errors in the

- 13 -J

### -A05025-19 imposition of sentences

### that are 

### incompatible with the 

### record'")). Appellant's 

### first issue is rejected as 

### meritless. Appellant's second issue involves only Docket Number 

### 2014-16687. In its 

### opinion, the 

### trial courtdescribed 

### the facts of

### that case as 

### follows: On 

### September 24, 2014, at 

### approximately 3:52 p.m. 

### [Appellant] robbed an Eat N Park on West 

### Liberty Avenue. 

### [Appellant] enteredthe 

### restaurantwearing a black hooded

### jacket, a bandanna covering his face 

### with a skull 

### pattern and red lips. The managers noticed 

### [Appellant] enter the 

### restaurant and head 

### forthe cash 

### register. Both managers began to yell

### "register!"and 

### [Appellant] seemed to become

### fearful and ran. 

### [Appellant] would 

### later confess

### that he

### attempted to rob this location. Trial 

### Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 6. The 

### Information therein charged as 

### follows: Count 1 ROBBERY-FORCE HOWEVER SLIGHT Felony 3 The 

### actor in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft, namely, 

### theft of United States 

### currency physically 

### took or removed 

### property from the person or persons of 

### [victim 1] 

### and/or [victim 2] by force, however slight, in 

### violation of Section 

### 3701(a)(1)(v) of the Pennsylvania Crimes Code, Act 

### of December 6, 1972, 18 Pa.C.S.§ 

### 3701(a)(1)(v). Information, 

### 2/2/15, at 1. The 

### relevant 

### statute provides as

### follows: § 

### 3701. Robbery 

### (a) Offense

## defined.- (1) A person is 

### guilty of 

### robbery if, in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft, he:
* * * 

### (v) physically takes or removes 

### property from the person of

### another byforce however

### slight[.]

- 14 -J

### -A05025-19 (2) An act shall be deemed 

### "in the course 

### of 

### committing a 

### theft" if it occurs in an 

### attempt to 

### commit 

### theft or in 

### flight after the 

### attempt or commission. 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(v), (a)(2). Appellant argues 

### that there was 

### insufficient evidence to 

### support his 

### conviction and contends the Commonwealth failed to prove beyond a reasonable 

### doubt 

### "that any 

### property was taken or removed, or 

### that [Appellant] used any force, and 

### therefore, did not establish the elements required to establish an offense 

### pursuant to 

### [18 Pa.C.S. §] 

### 3701(a)(1)(v)." Appellant's Briefat 32. 

### Appellant maintains 

### that he 

### "never touched 

### either of the managers or anyone else in the 

### restaurant. He did not remove any item 

### from anyone's person or 

### control. The 

### fact

### that his hand was reaching into his pocket and [he was] heading 

### for the cash 

### register did not establish 

### 'force however 

### slight." 

### Id. at 34. As noted by both 

### Appellant and the Commonwealth, 

### "force however 

### slight" occurs when the 

### victim is compelled 

### "to part with the conscious 

### control of 

### [his] 

### property." 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Brown, 484 A.2d 738, 742 (Pa. 

### 1984); Appellant's Brief at 33; Commonwealth's Brief at 24. The 

### trial court addressed 

### this issue as

### follows: 

### [Appellant] entered the 

### restaurant wearing a bandana 

### over his face and his hand reaching into his pocketand headed 

### straightfor the cash 

### register. Any reasonable 

### individual can 

### readily deduce 

### that [Appellant] was not 

### there to purchase a 

### smiley cookie or some pie. The 

### fact [Appellant] became scared by the yelling of the managers and fled 

### without any items is 

### irrelevant. Our State Supreme Court has held, 

### "that circumstances made it such 

### that

- 15 -J

### -A05025-19 appellant...failed to obtain and remove money 

### (or other valuables) is 

### irrelevant because 

### proof of an 

### attempted 

### theft is 

### sufficient to establish the 

### "in the course of 

### committing a 

### theft" element of 

### robbery." Commonwealth v. Sanchez, 36 A.3d 24, 

### [42] (2011). Therefore, 

### [Appellant's] claim is

### without merit. Trial 

### Court Opinion, 

### 10/11/18, at 15. We do not agree 

### with the

### trial court's reasoning. The section ofthe 

### statute charged in 

### this case required 

### that Appellant, in the course of

### committing a 

### theft, physically

### took or removed 

### propertyfrom the person of 

### another by force however slight. 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(v). In

### Commonwealth v. 

### Brandon, 79 A.3d 1192 (Pa. Super. 

### 2013), this Court stated, 

### "[U]nder the plain language of the 

### robbery 

### statute, the act of 

### 'physicallytaking or removing 

### propertyfromthe person of

### another' is required only under subsection (v) ofthe 

### robberystatute at section 

### 3701(a)(1)." 

### Id. at 1195. While the 

### trial court is 

### correct 

### that there need not be a completed 

### theft underthis subsection of3701, we have made clear

### thatthere must have been force used 

### "during an 

### attempted 

### theft." 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Lloyd, 545 A.2d 890, 892 (Pa. Super. 1988). Asthe Commonwealth points

### out,' itfailedto prove the

### element offorce
or

### taking and 

### removing. The 

### Commonwealth avers

### thatAppellant
never touched 

### either 

### victim, nor did he remove money from the 

### victim's person orcontrol. The 

### fact

### that [A]ppellant put his hands in his pockets is not 

### sufficient to establish 

### "force however 

### slight,"

We 

### appreciate the Commonwealth's candor in acknowledging 

### that it failed to 

### present 

### sufficient evidence to 

### support this conviction. Commonwealth's Briefat

### 24-26.

- 16 -J

### -A05025-19

as it did not compel the 

### victim to hand 

### over money. See 

### [Commonwealth v.] Brown, 

### [484 A.2d 

### 738,] 741-742 [(Pa. 

### 1984)]. Under a plain meaning of the 

### statute,

. . . the facts are 

### insufficient to sustain a 

### conviction under this subsection of the 

### statute. Commonwealth's Brief at 26. In regard to the use 

### of force, this Court has 

### stated: 

### It isclearto us

### that any

### amountofforceapplied to a person while 

### committing a 

### theft brings 

### that act 

### within the scope of 

### robbery under § 

### 3701(1)(a)(v). This force, of course, may be 

### either actual or

### constructive. Actual force is applied to the body; 

### constructiveforce isthe use

### of

### threatening words orgestures, and operates on the mind. The degree of actual force is 

### immaterial, so long as it is 

### sufficientto separatethe 

### victim from his 

### property in, on or 

### about his body. Any 

### injury to the 

### victim, or any 

### struggle to obtain the 

### property, or any resistance on his 

### part which requires a 

### greater counter attack to 

### effect the taking is 

### sufficient. The same is 

### true if the force used, 

### although insufficient to 

### frighten the 

### victim, surprises him into 

### yielding his 

### property. 

### Brown, 484 A.2d at 741 

### (internal citationomitted). In 

### this case, 

### there was no use of force nor 

### separation of 

### property from the

### victims, or even an 

### attempt to do so proven beyond a reasonable doubt. We cannot say

### that the Commonwealth's evidence

### that Appellant, wearing a bandanna, 

### with his hand in his pocket,walking toward the 

### registeratthe Eat'n Park 

### Restaurant was 

### sufficient to prove 

### robbery pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. § 

### 3701(a)(1)(v) beyond a reasonable doubt. In the absence of any evidence to 

### support this 

### element of the 

### crime, we reverse 

### Appellant's conviction at Docket Number 

### 2014-16687.

- 17 -J

### -A05025-19 

### If we can vacate a sentence 

### without upsetting the 

### trial court's overall sentencing scheme,we need not remand 

### for resentencing. 

### Commonwealth

v. 

### Thur, 906 A.2d 552, 570 (Pa. Super

### 2006). On the

### other hand,where the sentence vacated will affect the sentence imposed by the court, we 

### must remand. 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Williams, 550 A.2d 579 (Pa. Super. 

### 1988). We conclude herein 

### that a remand 

### for resentencing is not required. 

### See 

### Commonwealth v. 

### Robinson, 817A.2d 1153, 1163 n.14 (Pa. Super. 

### 2003) (no need to remand 

### for resentencing where 

### trialcourt's sentencing scheme is not upset by reversal of conviction and sentence 

### that was imposed 

### concurrentlyto sentence on 

### anotherconviction). The 

### conviction at Docket Number 

### 2014-16687 is reversed and the 

### judgment of sentence at 

### that docket number is vacated. The

### judgments of sentence 

### of all 

### other docket numbers appealed are 

### affirmed.
Judgment Entered.

J seph D.

# Seletyn,r Es 

### Prothonotary

Date: 

### 6/3/2019

- 18 -