Commonwealth v. Stidham
Commonwealth v. Stidham
Opinion of the Court
ORDER
Judgments of Sentence imposed under Information Nos. 1591 (murder) and 1593 (conspiracy) are affirmed.
Judgment of Sentence entered under Information No. 1594 (robbery) is vacated. See, Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981).
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I dissent from the majority’s order of this Court vacating appellant’s sentence for robbery. In support thereof I cite my dissenting opinion in Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981).
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
I dissent from the order of the Court insofar as it vacates appellant’s sentence for robbery on the authority of Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981). Appellant committed two separate and distinct offenses: robbery and murder of the second degree. I would overrule Tarver and hold that the lower court did not abuse its broad discretion in sentencing appellant for both crimes. See Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. at 331, 426 A.2d at 575 (dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Larsen). See also, Com
Reference
- Full Case Name
- COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Douglas STIDHAM
- Status
- Published