Commonwealth v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Johnson

613 A.2d 555, 531 Pa. 398, 1992 Pa. LEXIS 447

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided September 21, 1992·No. Appeal No. 128 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1991·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

[399] ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s assertions regarding suppression of evidence and insufficiency of the evidence are without merit. Similarly, for the reasons stated in Commonwealth v. Corporan, — Pa. -, 613 A.2d 530 (1992), appellant’s assertions regarding application of the mandatory sentencing provision, 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(3), are without merit. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

NIX, C.J., and LARSEN and McDERMOTT, JJ., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

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

[399] ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s assertions regarding suppression of evidence and insufficiency of the evidence are without merit. Similarly, for the reasons stated in Commonwealth v. Corporan, — Pa. -, 613 A.2d 530 (1992), appellant’s assertions regarding application of the mandatory sentencing provision, 18 Pa.C.S. § 7508(a)(3), are without merit. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

NIX, C.J., and LARSEN and McDERMOTT, JJ., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Commonwealth v. Johnson, 613 A.2d 555, 531 Pa. 398, 1992 Pa. LEXIS 447 (Pa. 1992).

Pincite

613 A.2d 555 (Commonwealth v. Johnson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related