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. NAGUSKI (12/11/72)

decided: December 11, 1972.

COMMONWEALTH
v.
NAGUSKI, APPELLANT



Appeal from judgment of sentence of Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, April T., 1969, No. 449, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Joseph Naguski, III.

COUNSEL

Stanley Bashman, and Donsky, Katz, Levin and Bashman, for appellant.

Bernard A. Moore and Stewart J. Greenleaf, Assistant District Attorneys, William T. Nicholas, First Assistant District Attorney, and Milton O. Moss, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Wright, P. J., Watkins, Jacobs, Hoffman, Spaulding, Cercone, and Packel, JJ. Dissenting Opinion by Spaulding, J. Hoffman and Packel, JJ., join in this dissenting opinion.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 301]

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Disposition

Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Dissenting Opinion by Spaulding, J.:

I respectfully dissent.

[ 223 Pa. Super. Page 302]

Appellant Joseph Naguski was convicted of carrying an unlicensed firearm in a motor vehicle in violation of the Uniform Firearms Act,*fn1 and of possessing narcotic drugs in violation of The Drug, Device and Cosmetic Act,*fn2 by a jury, in the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County. He appeals from the judgment of sentence.

On the evening of April 25, 1969, appellant and four other men arrived in appellant's car at an apartment building in Conshohocken which had been under surveillance for several weeks as a suspected center of drug traffic. The policeman at the scene knew only one of the men, Harold Thomas Rodenbaugh, an occupant of the dwelling. On leaving the building forty minutes later, two of the group returned to the automobile. Appellant, Rodenbaugh and another were heard engaged in an argument which was apparently over the quality of "some grass".*fn3 As the three re-entered appellant's automobile, the detectives at the site radioed ahead to a patrol car to intercept the vehicle. When the car was stopped, the intercepting officers tilted forward 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.