Commonwealth v. Gifford

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Gifford

450 A.2d 700, 304 Pa. Super. 319, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5154

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedSeptember 3, 1982

DocketNo. 2102

StatusPublished

This text of 450 A.2d 700 (Commonwealth v. Gifford) 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. Gifford, 450 A.2d 700, 304 Pa. Super. 319, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5154 (Pa. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

WATKINS, Judge:

This case comes to us on appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Criminal Division, and involves the defendant-appellant’s appeal from a judgment of sentence imposed by the court below after the defendant pled guilty to twelve (12) counts of forgery which had been set forth in four (4) indictments. The defendant claims that the court below erred when it imposed separate sets of costs on the defendant for each indictment. The four indictments had been consolidated into one proceeding.

Defendant cites 19 P.S. 1294 in support of her contention that she should have been assessed costs on only one information since all twelve (12) counts of the forgery charges were consolidated into one guilty plea proceeding. That section made it unlawful to impose costs in and on more than one indictment where all the charges “might legally have been included in one complaint and in one indictment by the use of different counts”. However, this provision was repealed by the legislature, effective June 27, 1979. The successor statute, 42 Pa.C.S.A. 1726, deals with costs generally but does not contain the requirements of the former section. The defendant was sentenced on September 2, 1980, after the repeal of the former section. Thus, we find no reason to hold the court’s sentence invalid. See [321]*321Footnote # 1 in Commonwealth v. Dorsey, 280 Pa.Superior Ct. 388, 421 A.2d 777 (1980).

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

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

WATKINS, Judge:

This case comes to us on appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Criminal Division, and involves the defendant-appellant’s appeal from a judgment of sentence imposed by the court below after the defendant pled guilty to twelve (12) counts of forgery which had been set forth in four (4) indictments. The defendant claims that the court below erred when it imposed separate sets of costs on the defendant for each indictment. The four indictments had been consolidated into one proceeding.

Defendant cites 19 P.S. 1294 in support of her contention that she should have been assessed costs on only one information since all twelve (12) counts of the forgery charges were consolidated into one guilty plea proceeding. That section made it unlawful to impose costs in and on more than one indictment where all the charges “might legally have been included in one complaint and in one indictment by the use of different counts”. However, this provision was repealed by the legislature, effective June 27, 1979. The successor statute, 42 Pa.C.S.A. 1726, deals with costs generally but does not contain the requirements of the former section. The defendant was sentenced on September 2, 1980, after the repeal of the former section. Thus, we find no reason to hold the court’s sentence invalid. See [321]*321Footnote # 1 in Commonwealth v. Dorsey, 280 Pa.Superior Ct. 388, 421 A.2d 777 (1980).

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

450 A.2d 700, 304 Pa. Super. 319, 1982 Pa. Super. LEXIS 5154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-gifford-pasuperct-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack