Commonwealth v. Mirra

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Mirra

281 A.2d 773, 220 Pa. Super. 393, 1971 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1174

CourtSuperior Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedSeptember 21, 1971

DocketAppeal, 540

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 281 A.2d 773 (Commonwealth v. Mirra) 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. Mirra, 281 A.2d 773, 220 Pa. Super. 393, 1971 Pa. Super. LEXIS 1174 (Pa. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Hoffman, J.,

Appellant was tried and found guilty of aggravated assault and battery in the Philadelphia Municipal Court and sentenced to one year probation. As of right, pursuant to the provisions of Section 16(r)(iii) of the Schedule to the Judiciary Article of the State Constitution, appellant received a trial de novo in the Court of Common Pleas. He was again found guilty of assault and battery, however his sentence was increased to eighteen months on probation and an order of restitution of $300.

In Commonwealth v. Harper, 219 Pa. Superior Ct. 100, 280 A. 2d 637 (1971), this Court held that, absent reasons appearing on the record, an appellant exercising his right of appeal in the Court of Common Pleas could not receive a higher sentence.

Accordingly, the judgment of sentence of eighteen months probation and restitution is vacated, and the sentence of one year probation is reinstated. Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211, 275 A. 2d 308 (1971).

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