Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Hale, T.
This text of Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Hale, T. (Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Hale, T.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[J-48-2015] [MO: Saylor, C.J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 25 EAP 2014 : Appellant : Appeal from The Judgment of Superior : Court entered on 02/06/2014 at No. 947 : EDA 2012 vacating and remanding the v. : Judgment of Sentence entered on : 03/12/2012 in the Court of Common : Pleas, Philadelphia County, Criminal TERELL HALE, : Division at No. CP-51-CR-0007307- : 2010. Appellee : : ARGUED: September 9, 2015
DISSENTING OPINION
MR. JUSTICE STEVENS DECIDED: December 21, 2015
I respectfully disagree with the Majority’s decision to affirm the Superior Court’s
order holding that a defendant’s past juvenile adjudication of delinquency for aggravated
assault does not qualify as a “conviction” for purposes of applying the sentencing
enhancement under the penalty provision of the persons-not-to-possess firearms
statute, 18 Pa.C.S. § 6105(a.1)(1). Therefore, I dissent.
This Court has held that a conviction is defined as “the ascertainment of the guilt
of the accused and judgment thereon by the court.” Commonwealth v. Kimmel, 523 Pa.
107, 565 A.2d 426, 428 (1989). However, in the context of the Death Penalty Statute,
this Court has accorded the term a broader reach, encompassing instances in which
there has been a finding of guilt, even though a judgment of sentence has not yet been
imposed. Commonwealth v. Beasley, 505 Pa. 279, 479 A.2d 460 (1984). A juvenile delinquency adjudication, which involves a finding that a juvenile committed a criminal
act, see 42 Pa.C.S. § 6341(a), (b), has been treated as a conviction at the sentencing
phase of a death penalty case to establish an aggravating circumstance.1 See
Commonwealth v. Baker, 531 Pa. 541, 614 A.2d 663 (1992). Furthermore, this Court
has found juvenile delinquency adjudications are admissible to rebut mitigating
circumstances in death penalty cases. See Commonwealth v. Stokes, 532 Pa. 242,
615 A.2d 704 (1992).
The Commonwealth requests that this Court give the word “convicted” the same
meaning in the instant statute as we have in the Death Penalty Statute. I agree with the
Commonwealth’s viewpoint in this regard, and therefore, I would reverse the Superior
Court’s order.
1 42 Pa.C.S. § 9711(d)(9) provides that, in death penalty cases, the following shall be considered an aggravating circumstance: “The defendant has a significant history of felony convictions involving the use or threat of violence to the person.”
[J-48-2015] [MO: Saylor, C.J.] - 2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Hale, T., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-aplt-v-hale-t-pa-2015.