Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2006

Commonwealth v. Wesley

Commonwealth v. Wesley
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · Decided April 25, 2006 · Cappy, Castille, Nigro, Newman, Saylor, Eakin, Baer
896 A.2d 564; 586 Pa. 621; 2006 Pa. LEXIS 635 (Atlantic Reporter, Second Series)

Commonwealth v. Wesley

Opinion of the Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed as having been improvidently granted.

Former Justice Nigro did not participate in the decision of this case.

Justice BAER files a concurring statement in which Justice NEWMAN joins.

Concurring Opinion

Justice BAER,

concur.

In this appeal, Appellant Harmon Wesley was convicted by a jury in criminal court, and the Superior Court affirmed the *622judgment of sentence. On appeal, Appellant raises issues regarding the prosecutor’s closing arguments and the jury instructions during his criminal trial. Our Court now dismisses Appellant’s appeal as having been improvidently granted.

I write separately to note that although Appellant complains of the prosecutor’s closing arguments and the jury instructions, he has not provided this- Court with a transcript covering the complained-of closing remarks and jury charge, making substantive review impossible. I concur with the majority’s disposition because it is incumbent on Appellant to ensure that this Court is provided with documents necessary to a complete assessment of his arguments for reversal, and Appellant has failed to do so. See Pa.R.A.P.1931, explanatory cmt. (2004). Whether such failure is the result of ineffective assistance of counsel must be left for another day. See Commonwealth v. Grant, 572 Pa. 48, 813 A.2d 726 (2002).

Justice NEWMAN joins this concurring statement.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.