Case Name: Commonwealth v. Matcheson et al., Appellants
Court: Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1969-11-12
Citations: 215 Pa. Super. 371
Docket Number: Appeals, Nos. 485 and 550
Parties: Commonwealth v. Matcheson et al., Appellants.
Judges: Before Weight, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Cercone, JJ.
Reporter: Pennsylvania Superior Court Reports
Volume: 215
Pages: 371–375

Head Matter:
Commonwealth v. Matcheson et al., Appellants.
Argued September 9, 1969.
Before Weight, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Cercone, JJ.
John J. Brier, Assistant Public Defender, with Mm Andrew Hailstone, for appellants.
Harry P. O’Neill, Jr., Assistant District Attorney, with him Joseph J. Cimimo, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
November 12, 1969:

Opinion:
Opinion by
Montgomery, J.,
These two appeals were tried and argued together and will be disposed of in this opinion. Both cases raise the same issue. That issue is whether the trial judge erred in denying defendants' motions for a mistrial, based upon the possession by the jurors of copies of the criminal list containing a listing of two additional indictments against one of the defendants, Matcheson.
Following the return of a verdict of guilty by the jury, both defendants submitted themselves for sentence without filing any post-trial motions and sentences were imposed from which these appeals were taken. The verdict was rendered on October 3, 1968, and the sentences were imposed on February 7, 1969. Both appellants were represented by counsel at all times.
The well-established doctrine followed by our appellate courts is that, generally, they need not entertain arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Commonwealth v. Williams, 432 Pa. 557, 248 A. 2d 301 (1968); Commonwealth v. Ludlow, 206 Pa. Superior Ct. 464, 214 A. 2d 282 (1965). Thus, where no post-conviction motions have been filed, the general rule applies, and no appeal lies to this Court. Commonwealth v. Mays, 182 Pa. Superior Ct. 130, 126 A. 2d 530 (1956).
Occasionally our appellate courts have relaxed this rule. See Commonwealth v. Williams, supra; Com monwealth v. Dessus, 423 Pa. 177, 224 A. 2d 188 (1966); Commonwealth v. Price, 208 Pa. Superior Ct. 354, 222 A. 2d 610 (1966); Commonwealth v. Dulacy, 204 Pa. Superior Ct. 163, 203 A. 2d 587 (1964); Commonwealth v. Gary, 193 Pa. Superior Ct. 111, 163 A. 2d 696 (1960). However, we do not consider the present case as falling within the exceptions set forth in the above and other similar cases.
The withdrawal of a juror and the declaration of a mistrial was within the discretion of the trial judge. Commonwealth v. Smith, 432 Pa. 517, 248 A. 2d 24 (1968).
Appeals dismissed.
Pa. Rule of Criminal Procedure, adopted January 24, 1968, effective August 1, 1968, replaced the practice of moving for the withdrawal of a juror with the motion to declare a mistrial.