Commonwealth v. Saunders
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
In this direct appeal from convictions for second-degree murder, robbery, and criminal conspiracy,1 appellant contends that his statement was the product of an unnecessary delay between arrest and arraignment,2 and that he was not given adequate warnings before a polygraph examination was administered. Neither of these arguments was reduced to writing in appellant’s post-trial motions, as was required at the time of trial by Pa.R.Crim.P. 1123(a) and our decision in Commonwealth v. Blair, 460 Pa. 31, 33 n.1, 331 A.2d 213 (1975). Both issues have therefore been waived.
Judgments of sentence affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
380 A.2d 361 (Commonwealth v. Saunders) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.