Commonwealth v. Gilmore

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Gilmore

437 A.2d 944, 496 Pa. 420, 1981 Pa. LEXIS 1108

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedDecember 17, 1981

DocketAppeal No. 306

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 437 A.2d 944 (Commonwealth v. Gilmore) 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.

Bluebook

Commonwealth v. Gilmore, 437 A.2d 944, 496 Pa. 420, 1981 Pa. LEXIS 1108 (Pa. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is a direct appeal from judgments of sentence imposed by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia upon a [421]*421verdict of guilty of murder of the first degree and robbery. Appellant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment for the murder and a concurrent term of ten to twenty years’ imprisonment for the robbery.

Appellant, who is represented on this appeal by counsel other than his trial counsel, challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction of felony murder, as well as the constitutionality of the felony-murder doctrine. Additionally, appellant claims that his arrest was invalid because it was effectuated in his home without an arrest warrant and without probable cause, and that his statements to police following the arrest should have been suppressed. Appellant’s final claim of error is that a statement by the victim to police shortly after the victim had regained consciousness was erroneously admitted as within the res gestae exception to the rule against hearsay. We are convinced that appellant’s claims of error are without merit. Accordingly, we affirm judgments of sentence.

Judgments of sentence affirmed.

ROBERTS, J., dissents for the reasons set forth in Commonwealth v. Miller, 490 Pa. 457, 417 A.2d 128 (1980) (Roberts, J., dissenting).

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

This is a direct appeal from judgments of sentence imposed by the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia upon a [421]*421verdict of guilty of murder of the first degree and robbery. Appellant was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment for the murder and a concurrent term of ten to twenty years’ imprisonment for the robbery.

Appellant, who is represented on this appeal by counsel other than his trial counsel, challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction of felony murder, as well as the constitutionality of the felony-murder doctrine. Additionally, appellant claims that his arrest was invalid because it was effectuated in his home without an arrest warrant and without probable cause, and that his statements to police following the arrest should have been suppressed. Appellant’s final claim of error is that a statement by the victim to police shortly after the victim had regained consciousness was erroneously admitted as within the res gestae exception to the rule against hearsay. We are convinced that appellant’s claims of error are without merit. Accordingly, we affirm judgments of sentence.

Judgments of sentence affirmed.

ROBERTS, J., dissents for the reasons set forth in Commonwealth v. Miller, 490 Pa. 457, 417 A.2d 128 (1980) (Roberts, J., dissenting).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

437 A.2d 944, 496 Pa. 420, 1981 Pa. LEXIS 1108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-gilmore-pa-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack