Commonwealth v. White

504 A.2d 930, 350 Pa. Super. 457
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedSeptember 23, 1986
Docket00934
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 504 A.2d 930 (Commonwealth v. White) 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. White, 504 A.2d 930, 350 Pa. Super. 457 (Pa. 1986).

Opinion

BECK, Judge:

On appeal appellant raises a single challenge: whether the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury that a mandatory sentence (under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9712(a)) would be imposed upon appellant if he was found guilty.

The jury found appellant guilty and the court imposed the mandatory sentence. The appellant’s attorney had requested that the jury be informed that guilt carried with it the mandatory sentence. The trial court refused to so inform the jury.

We find that the trial court was correct. The function of the jury is to determine guilt or innocence. According to *459 the Pennsylvania Supreme Court “the jury has nothing to do with the punishment of an offense, ... [i]n all other instances, punishment is a matter solely for the court and not for the jury to know or consider during its deliberations.” Commonwealth v. Lucier, 424 Pa. 47, 49, 225 A.2d 890, 891 (1967). See also Commonwealth v. Waters, 334 Pa.Super. 513, 522, 483 A.2d 855, 860 (1984); Commonwealth v. Dombrauskas, 274 Pa.Super. 452, 457, 418 A.2d 493, 496 (1980).

Visible possession of a firearm is not an element of a crime punishable under § 9712. Commonwealth v. Wright, 508 Pa. 25, 35, 494 A.2d 354, 359 (1985); Commonwealth v. Norris, 346 Pa.Super. 351, 355, 499 A.2d 644, 647 (1985). Defendants charged under § 9712, therefore, have no right to a trial by jury to determine the application of the act. Commonwealth v. Anderson, 345 Pa.Super. 407, 498 A.2d 887, 889 (1985); Commonwealth v. Cofoni, 349 Pa.Super. 407, 503 A.2d 431 (1986). Accordingly, the trial court in the case sub judice did not err in refusing the appellant’s requested instruction.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

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

Related

Com. v. Warfel, F.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2022
Com. v. Hughes, P.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2019
Com. v. Rodriguez, M.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2017
Com. v. Sourbeer, D.
Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2016
Commonwealth v. Battista
26 Pa. D. & C.4th 395 (Delaware County Court of Common Pleas, 1995)
Commonwealth v. Golinsky
626 A.2d 1224 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Commonwealth v. Carbaugh
620 A.2d 1169 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1993)
Commonwealth v. Moore
542 A.2d 106 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1988)
Commonwealth v. White
531 A.2d 806 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
504 A.2d 930, 350 Pa. Super. 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commonwealth-v-white-pa-1986.