Commonwealth v. Scrivens

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Commonwealth v. Scrivens

292 A.2d 313, 448 Pa. 60, 1972 Pa. LEXIS 432

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJune 28, 1972

DocketAppeal, No. 389

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.2d 313 (Commonwealth v. Scrivens) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme 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. Scrivens, 292 A.2d 313, 448 Pa. 60, 1972 Pa. LEXIS 432 (Pa. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

After a plea of guilty to murder generally in 1970, appellant was found guilty of murder in the second degree and received a sentence of five years probation under the supervision of the State Parole Board. On April 5, 1971, this probation was revoked for cause and the court sentenced appellant to a prison term of 11% to 23 months. Subsequently, on April 8, 1971, the same judge “reconsidered” the earlier sentence and substituted a new one of one to five years imprisonment. The record indicates that no new information had been received by the court at the time of reconsideration, and no justification appears for the increase in appellant’s punishment. The Commonwealth concedes that the higher sentence of April 8 constituted double jeopardy and must be vacated. Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96, 277 A. 2d 803 (1971); Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211, 275 A. 2d 308 (1971).

The judgment of sentence imposed on April 8, 1971, is vacated; the judgment of sentence imposed on April 5, 1971, is reinstated.

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

Opinion

Per Curiam,

After a plea of guilty to murder generally in 1970, appellant was found guilty of murder in the second degree and received a sentence of five years probation under the supervision of the State Parole Board. On April 5, 1971, this probation was revoked for cause and the court sentenced appellant to a prison term of 11% to 23 months. Subsequently, on April 8, 1971, the same judge “reconsidered” the earlier sentence and substituted a new one of one to five years imprisonment. The record indicates that no new information had been received by the court at the time of reconsideration, and no justification appears for the increase in appellant’s punishment. The Commonwealth concedes that the higher sentence of April 8 constituted double jeopardy and must be vacated. Commonwealth v. Allen, 443 Pa. 96, 277 A. 2d 803 (1971); Commonwealth v. Silverman, 442 Pa. 211, 275 A. 2d 308 (1971).

The judgment of sentence imposed on April 8, 1971, is vacated; the judgment of sentence imposed on April 5, 1971, is reinstated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.2d 313, 448 Pa. 60, 1972 Pa. LEXIS 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-scrivens-pa-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack