Court Opinion

ID: 9732282
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 16:13:49.704233+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:23:24.890304
License: Public Domain

ROWLEY, Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent for the reasons set forth in Part I of the Dissenting Opinion of Judge Kelly concerning the sufficiency of the evidence.
*281However, I also disagree with Part II of Judge Kelly’s Dissenting Opinion in which he concludes that the presence of the victim’s widow at the counsel table during voir dire was prejudicial. The trial court has wide discretion to control conduct at trial, Commonwealth v. Jones, 314 Pa. Super. 497, 461 A.2d 267 (1983), and in my opinion the trial court did not abuse that discretion. Therefore, I would affirm the judgment of sentence.