Commonwealth v. Keesey

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Keesey

396 A.2d 34, 261 Pa. Super. 540

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided November 17, 1978·No. Appeal, No. 767·Published

Opinion

[541] OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The record containing neither an opinion nor explanation by the lower court for its imposition of sentence, it is hereby ordered that the judgment of sentence be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. The sentencing judge is to file, forthwith, a statement of reasons for the particular sentence imposed. See, Commonwealth v. Riggins, 474 Pa. 115, 377 A.3d 140 (1977); Commonwealth v. Martin, 466 Pa. 118, 351 A.2d 650 (1976); Commonwealth v. Kostka, 475 Pa. 85, 379 A.2d 884 (1977); Commonwealth v. Wertz, 252 Pa.Super. 584, 384 A.2d 933 (1978). Also see Pa.R.App.P. 1925.

PRICE, J., dissented. WATKINS, former P. J., and HOFFMAN, J., 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

[541] OPINION

PER CURIAM:

The record containing neither an opinion nor explanation by the lower court for its imposition of sentence, it is hereby ordered that the judgment of sentence be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. The sentencing judge is to file, forthwith, a statement of reasons for the particular sentence imposed. See, Commonwealth v. Riggins, 474 Pa. 115, 377 A.3d 140 (1977); Commonwealth v. Martin, 466 Pa. 118, 351 A.2d 650 (1976); Commonwealth v. Kostka, 475 Pa. 85, 379 A.2d 884 (1977); Commonwealth v. Wertz, 252 Pa.Super. 584, 384 A.2d 933 (1978). Also see Pa.R.App.P. 1925.

PRICE, J., dissented. WATKINS, former P. J., and HOFFMAN, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Commonwealth v. Keesey, 396 A.2d 34, 261 Pa. Super. 540 (Pa. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

396 A.2d 34 (Commonwealth v. Keesey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related