Court Opinion

ID: 9700297
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 21:19:00.445156+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:06.811992
License: Public Domain

JOHNSON, Judge,
concurring.
Randolph Woods contends that there was insufficient evidence upon which to convict him of carrying a firearm without a license, 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106(a). The only case authority advanced by Woods to support his contention is Commonwealth v. Bryant, 341 Pa.Super. 123, 491 A.2d 181 (1985). That case was decided prior to the 1988 amendments to the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act.
The evidence presented by the Commonwealth on this appeal was sufficient to establish that Woods had not complied with § 6109(b), requiring application for licensure with the sheriff of the county in which Woods resides. Given the limited argument advanced by Woods, I would leave to another day the consideration of questions which might arise in future, unrelated litigation.
I concur in the conclusion that the argument on sufficiency of the evidence is without merit and the judgment of sentence must be affirmed.