Case Name: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. David BRICKER, Petitioner
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 2018-01-03
Citations: 177 A.3d 823
Docket Number: No. 5 WAL 2016
Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. David BRICKER, Petitioner
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 177
Pages: 823–824

Head Matter:
COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, Respondent v. David BRICKER, Petitioner
No. 5 WAL 2016
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
January 3, 2018

Opinion:
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 3rd day of January, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to the remaining issue. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:
Did the sentencing court impose a harsh, severe, and manifestly unreasonable and excessive sentence in light of the circumstances surrounding the alleged incident?
The judgment of sentence is VACATED, and the matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court for reconsideration in light of Commonwealth v. Muniz, - Pa. -, 164 A.3d 1189 (2017).