Commonwealth v. Woods

495 A.2d 539, 508 Pa. 294, 1985 Pa. LEXIS 358
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 12, 1985·No. No. 73 E.D. Appeal Docket 1984·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

[296]*296OPINION

NIX, Chief Justice.

In this case the Commonwealth appeals the trial court’s determination that section 9712 of the Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act, 42 Pa.C.S. § 9712, is unconstitutional. That section requires the imposition of a minimum sentence of five years total confinement if it is established by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant was in visible possession of a firearm during the commission of certain felonies.1 In light of our recent decision in Commonwealth v. Wright, 508 Pa. 25, 494 A.2d 354 (1985), we find it unnecessary to discuss at length the issues raised in this appeal.

In Commonwealth v. Wright, supra, we held that the preponderance standard of proof prescribed in section 9712 satisfies the minimum requirements of due process. Accordingly, the lower court’s holding that section 9712 is unconstitutional is reversed, the sentence imposed is vacated and the cause is remanded for resentencing pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. § 9712.

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

Commonwealth v. Woods, 495 A.2d 539, 508 Pa. 294, 1985 Pa. LEXIS 358 (Pa. 1985).

495 A.2d 539 (Commonwealth v. Woods) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Wooten
545 A.2d 876 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1988)
Commonwealth v. Williams
509 A.2d 409 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1986)