Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

COMMONWEALTH v. KEELER (03/12/70)

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: March 12, 1970.

COMMONWEALTH
v.
KEELER, APPELLANT

Appeal from order of Court of Common Pleas, of Crawford County, Sept. T., 1961, Nos. 37-B and 38-B, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Norman Harry Keeler, Jr.

COUNSEL

Mark D. Prather, for appellant.

David P. Truax, Assistant District Attorney, and Paul D. Shafer, Jr., District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Montgomery, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, and Cercone, JJ. Concurring Opinion by Spaulding, J. Hoffman, J., joins in this concurring opinion.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 216 Pa. Super. Page 176]

Order affirmed.

Disposition

Order affirmed.

Concurring Opinion by Spaulding, J.:

I concur in the affirmance of the order of the court below.

In September 1961, appellant, Norman Harry Keeler, Jr., pleaded guilty to the charges of unlawful possession of firearms, and of bringing stolen property into the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. No sentence was imposed at that time. Appellant was paroled from sentence on other charges in October 1965, and reincarcerated for parole violation in February 1968. In May 1968, appellant was brought before the Court of Quarter Sessions of Crawford County for sentencing on the September 1961 offenses. The court fully apprised him of his right to withdraw the guilty plea, and the consequences of its renewal. After conferring with his counsel, appellant knowingly and intelligently renewed his guilty plea, and thereby waived all non-jurisdictional defenses. Commonwealth v. Hill, 427 Pa. 614, 235 A.2d 347 (1967).

We do not reach the question whether appellant's Sixth Amendment rights were violated by the six and one-half year delay between the entry of his original plea and the sentencing. Nor do we determine whether appellant must request sentencing before he can complain of the delay. See generally Klopfer v. North Carolina, 386 U.S. 213 (1967); United States v. Ewell, 383 U.S. 116 (1966).

19700312

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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