Case Name: Commonwealth v. Brown, Appellant
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1972-12-11
Citations: 223 Pa. Super. 182
Docket Number: Appeals, Nos. 1586 and 1587
Parties: Commonwealth v. Brown, Appellant.
Judges: Before Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 223
Pages: 182–185

Head Matter:
Commonwealth v. Brown, Appellant.
Argued September 15, 1972.
Before Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ.
Andrea Levin, Assistant Defender, with her Jonathan Miller, Assistant Defender, and Vincent J. Ziccardi, Defender, for appellant.
David Richman, Assistant District Attorney, with him Milton M. Stein, Assistant District Attorney, Riehmd A. Sprague, First Assistant District Attorney, and Arlen Specter, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
December 11, 1972:

Opinion:
Opinion by
Hoffman, J.,
Appellant contends that this Court must hold that a search and seizure was illegal with respect to him because the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that the search of an automobile occupied by the appellant and his co-defendant was illegal with respect to the co-defendant, Commonwealth v. Lewis, 442 Pa. 98, 275 A. 2d 51 (1971). The facts of the search as set forth in Lewis are identical to the circumstances presented in the instant matter. Appellant is also in the same posture with respect to standing as his co-defendant Lewis. If this Court fails to effectuate the Lewis opinion by holding that the search is valid with respect to the appellant, we would deny appellant the same protection of his constitutional rights as was accorded his co-defendant. See Commonwealth v. Fleming, 221 Pa. Superior Ct. 481, 291 A. 2d 874 (1972); Commonwealth v. Fleischman, 221 Pa. Superior Ct. 482, 291 A. 2d 874 (1972).
Accordingly, the judgment of the lower court is reversed and a new trial ordered.