Court Opinion

ID: 9758196
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 23:15:16.845516+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:28:47.794733
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Roberts:
I concur in the result solely on the ground that appellant, as a matter of trial strategy, neither made an objection at trial to Detective Yerbrugghe’s testimony relative to appellant’s pre-trial statements, nor raised an objection post-trial to the voluntariness of those statements. Cf. Commonwealth v. McGrogan, 449 Pa. 584, 297 A. 2d 456 (1972). Not having done so, appellant is now precluded from challenging the voluntariness of his pre-trial statements. Commonwealth v. Agie, 449 Pa. 187, 296 A. 2d 741 (1972).
Mr. Justice Manderino joins in this concurring opinion.