Court Opinion

ID: 9631149
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 10:30:06.867864+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:07:49.338019
License: Public Domain

*191Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Pomeroy:
I adhere to the view expressed in my dissenting opinion in Commonwealth v. Dutton, 453 Pa. 547 at 551, 307 A.2d 238 at 240 (1973), that our decision in Commonwealth v. Futch, 447 Pa. 389, 290 A.2d 417 (1972), should be applied prospectively only. Moreover, even if Futch is to be applied to render inadmissible evidence obtained in violation of Rule 118 before the date of that decision, this Court should not consider on direct appeal issues not properly presented to the court below. Commonwealth v. Bittner, 441 Pa. 216, 272 A.2d 484 (1971); Commonwealth v. Myers, 439 Pa. 381, 266 A.2d 756 (1970). In this case post-trial motions were waived. Hence any objection under Rule 118  to the admissibility of the confession, as well as the other points considered in the Court’s opinion, are not properly before the Court.
Mr. Chief Justice Jones and Mr. Justice Eagen join in this concurring opinion.