Commonwealth v. Belgrave

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Belgrave

391 A.2d 662, 258 Pa. Super. 40, 1978 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3036

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJuly 12, 1978

Docket2073

StatusPublished

Cited by38 cases

This text of 391 A.2d 662 (Commonwealth v. Belgrave) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Belgrave, 391 A.2d 662, 258 Pa. Super. 40, 1978 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3036 (Pa. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinions

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

The court is unanimous that on the merits the convictions should be affirmed for the reasons stated in Judge CER-CONE’s Concurring and Dissenting Opinion. However, JACOBS, P. J., and HOFFMAN, PRICE and SPAETH, JJ., are of the opinion that the judgment of sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing under Commonwealth v. Lockhart, 223 Pa.Super. 60, 296 A.2d 883 (1972).

So ordered.

CERCONE, J., files a Concurring and Dissenting Opinion in which VAN der VOORT, J., joins. WATKINS, former President Judge, did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI