Commonwealth v. Holloway

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Holloway

223 A.2d 529, 208 Pa. Super. 482, 1966 Pa. Super. LEXIS 872

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Commonwealth v. Holloway. Read the opinion of the Court — 212 Pa. Super. 250 →

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 25, 1966·No. Appeals, Nos. 603 and 604·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The six judges who heard the argument of this appeal being equally divided in opinion, the judgment of sentence of the court below is affirmed. The defendant is directed to appear in the court below at such time as he may be there called, and that he be by that court committed until he has complied with the sentence, or any part of it which had not been performed at the time the appeal was made a supersedeas.

Hoffman, Jacobs, and Spaulding, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Hoffman, J., in Com v. Young, 208 Pa. Superior Ct. 478, 223 A. 2d 527 (1966).

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

Opinion

Per Curiam,

The six judges who heard the argument of this appeal being equally divided in opinion, the judgment of sentence of the court below is affirmed. The defendant is directed to appear in the court below at such time as he may be there called, and that he be by that court committed until he has complied with the sentence, or any part of it which had not been performed at the time the appeal was made a supersedeas.

Hoffman, Jacobs, and Spaulding, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Hoffman, J., in Com v. Young, 208 Pa. Superior Ct. 478, 223 A. 2d 527 (1966).

Commonwealth v. Holloway, 223 A.2d 529, 208 Pa. Super. 482, 1966 Pa. Super. LEXIS 872 (Pa. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

223 A.2d 529 (Commonwealth v. Holloway) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related