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 PENNSYLVANIA v. NICHOLAS W. ILLICH (06/05/79)

SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


decided: June 5, 1979.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
NICHOLAS W. ILLICH, APPELLANT

Nos. 10 and 11 Special Transfer Docket, Appeals from Judgments of Sentence of Court of Common Pleas, Criminal, County of Philadelphia, at Nos. 997, 998 and 999, 1976

COUNSEL

Edward Reif, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Robert B. Lawler, Assistant District Attorney, Chief, Appeals Div., Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Hoffman, Eagen and Hess, JJ.*fn*

Author: Per Curiam

[ 266 Pa. Super. Page 514]

Appellant, Nicholas W. Illich, has appealed from the judgments of sentence after convictions for murder of the third degree, conspiracy and a weapons charge. He elected to be tried non-jury. The only question raised on appeal relates to the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdicts. When confronted with that issue, it is, of course, axiomatic that the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict-winner, in this case the Commonwealth.

[ 266 Pa. Super. Page 515]

    do bodily harm. Commonwealth v. Kidd, 251 Pa. Super. 140, 380 A.2d 416 (1977).

The closer question is whether Illich abandoned the conspiracy. Given knowledge of the prior week's events, Illich should have known his actions would precipitate further confrontations. Also, the court found the conspiracy was neither accomplished nor abandoned by the departure of A's car. In Commonwealth v. Roux, 465 Pa. 482, 490, 350 A.2d 867, 871 (1976), the Supreme Court said: "Moreover, for an abandonment to be legally sufficient, it must occur before the commission of the crime becomes so imminent that avoidance is out of the question."

The evidence was more than sufficient to sustain the convictions. The death of the victim was the end result of appellant's "shared intent" and agreement with his co-defendants to commit assault and do bodily harm. "The least degree of concert or collusion between parties to an illegal transaction makes the act of one the act of all." Commonwealth v. Strantz, 328 Pa. 33, 40, 195 A. 75, 79 (1937). Appellant's participation in the events giving rise to the death was, in fact, major. These facts having been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, appellant's convictions and sentences must be affirmed.


*fn* Chief Justice Michael J. Eagen of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and Judge Warren K. Hess of the Court of Common Pleas of Berks County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.


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.