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 PENNSYLVANIA v. CLIFTON FAUNTROY (12/01/77)

decided: December 1, 1977.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CLIFTON FAUNTROY, APPELLANT



COUNSEL

Suzanna F. Mottola, Carol J. Clarfeld, Philadelphia, for appellant.

F. Emmett Fitzpatrick, Dist. Atty., Steven H. Goldblatt, Asst. Dist. Atty., Chief, Appeals Div., Mark Sendrow, Asst. Dist. Atty., Asst. Chief, Appeals Div., for appellee.

Jones, C. J., and Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino and Packel, JJ. Roberts, J., filed a concurring opinion.

Author: Per Curiam

[ 475 Pa. Page 288]

OPINION OF THE COURT

Appellant, Clifton Fauntroy, was found guilty in November, 1973, of murder in the first degree and conspiracy. Post-trial motions were denied, and a judgment of sentence of life imprisonment was imposed on the murder charge;

[ 475 Pa. Page 289]

    sentence on the conspiracy charge was suspended. No timely appeal from the judgment of sentence was taken.

In January, 1976, appellant filed a petition under the Post-Conviction Hearing Act*fn1 alleging that he had been denied his rights relative to appeal. Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 83 S.Ct. 814, 9 L.Ed.2d 811 (1963). Finding that the Commonwealth had not shown that Fauntroy had waived his appellate rights, the PCHA court granted him leave to file an appeal nunc pro tunc and denied all other relief. Appellant then took this appeal,*fn2 which the record reveals to be from the order of the PCHA court, not from the judgment of sentence.

It is evident from an examination of the briefs filed on appellant's behalf that he intended by this appeal to challenge both the judgment of sentence on the murder conviction (which had been entered only after post-trial motions had been filed and denied) and the denial by the PCHA court of his request for collateral relief other than recognition of his appellate rights.*fn3 We have in this case overlooked the procedural irregularities*fn4 and, having carefully

[ 475 Pa. Page 290]

    considered the arguments made by appellant in his briefs, find them to be without merit.*fn5

Judgment of sentence affirmed; order of the court of common pleas denying ...


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.