Court Opinion

ID: 9646876
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 13:14:19.944196+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:59:24.520547
License: Public Domain

CIRILLO, President Judge *,
concurring:
I agree with the result reached by the majority. However, I would not decide the sentencing issues raised by the appellants because neither appellant has “set forth in his brief a concise statement of the reasons relied upon for allowance of appeal with respect to the discretionary aspects of ... sentence.” Pa.R.A.P. 2119(f). Accordingly, since neither appellant has properly petitioned for allowance of appeal on the discretionary aspects of sentence by attempting to demonstrate a “substantial question that the sentence imposed is not appropriate under [the Sentencing Code],” 42 Pa.C.S. § 9781(b), we should not allow their *337appeals on the sentencing issues. See Commonwealth v. Tuladziecki, 513 Pa. 508, 522 A.2d 17 (1987).

 Filed May 1, 1987