Court Opinion

ID: 9693615
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 16:52:41.537902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:48.966679
License: Public Domain

ROBERTS, Chief Justice,
concurring.
Although I agree that on the present record appellants are not entitled to relief from the term of imprisonment imposed, I must write separately to point out that, contrary to the assumption of the majority, appellants should not have been convicted of two separate offenses. Section 4416(b) of the Penal Code provides only that a sentence imposed for the crime of aggravated robbery may be enhanced where the actor has employed a firearm. See Commonwealth v. Simpson, 302 Pa.Super. 287, 448 A.2d 640 (1982); Commonwealth v. Turner, 265 Pa.Super. 486, 402 A.2d 542 (1979); *355Commonwealth ex rel. Curry v. Myers, 195 Pa.Super. 480, 171 A.2d 792 (1961).
Accordingly, the judgments of sentence imposed for aggravated robbery should be modified to reflect the enhanced term of imprisonment intended by the court’s imposition of consecutive sentences and the judgments of sentence imposed for the “commission of a crime of violence with a firearm” should be vacated.
NIX, J., joins in this concurring opinion.