Court Opinion

ID: 9703195
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:44:39.506874+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:46.454054
License: Public Domain

ROBERTS, Justice,
concurring.
Although the judgment of sentence should be affirmed, it must be pointed out that, irrespective of whether the Commonwealth violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1962), the Commonwealth clearly violated Pa.R.Crim.Proc. 305. Under Rule 305 A, effective January 1, 1978 (well before appellant’s trial), the Commonwealth was obliged, before trial, to disclose “[a]ny evidence favorable to the accused which is material either to guilt or to punishment. ...” Accord, ABA Standards Relating to Prosecution Function § 3.11(a) (Approved Draft, 1971); Pa. Code of Prof.Resp. DR 7 — 103(B). Surely it must be concluded that evidence of another person’s possession of a weapon at the scene of the alleged offense must be deemed “favorable” to the accused. However, appellant is not entitled to relief because the record establishes that, without prejudice to the defense, the “favorable” evidence was fully presented to the factfinder, and rejected.