Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

COMMONWEALTH v. BYKOWSKI ET AL. (12/21/66)

decided: December 21, 1966.

COMMONWEALTH
v.
BYKOWSKI ET AL., APPELLANTS



Appeal from judgments of Court of Quarter Sessions of Allegheny County, March T., 1963, No. 343, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Raymond Bykowski et al.

COUNSEL

Martin M. Sheinman, with him Hubert I. Teitelbaum, and Morris, Safier & Teitelbaum, for appellants.

Edwin J. Martin, Assistant District Attorney, with him Robert W. Duggan, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Ervin, P. J., Wright, Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, and Spaulding, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Spaulding, J. Hoffman, J., joins in this opinion.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 209 Pa. Super. Page 142]

The judgments of sentence are affirmed and the appellants are directed to appear in the court below, at such time as they may be there called, to be by that court committed until they have complied with the sentences or any parts thereof which had not been performed at the time the appeal was made a supersedeas.

Disposition

Judgments affirmed.

[ 209 Pa. Super. Page 143]

Dissenting Opinion by Spaulding, J.:

This is an appeal by Raymond Bykowski and Walter Rachuba from convictions of operating a lottery and of conspiracy to operate a lottery.

On March 15, 1962, search warrants were issued by a United States Commissioner for 529 Evergreen Avenue, Millvale, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania and for another property with which we are not now concerned. The following day appellants were arrested in the Evergreen property and certain evidence was seized.*fn1 Subsequently, the Federal charges were withdrawn and the seized evidence was turned over to Allegheny County authorities who indicted appellants. A preliminary hearing on a motion to suppress resulted in dismissal and a jury trial followed.

Appellants' primary contention is that improper force was used in the execution of the search warrants, thus rendering them illegal and the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.