No. 3024 October Term, 1978, Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Criminal Division, Nos. 236, 239, 240, 243 January Term, 1978.
Stephen R. LaCheen, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Eric B. Henson, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Price, Wickersham and Lipez, JJ.
[ 288 Pa. Super. Page 233]
Following a non-jury trial, appellant, William Spencer Jenkins, was found guilty of two counts each of robbery,*fn1 conspiracy*fn2 and possession of an instrument of crime.*fn3 Following denial of post-verdict motions, he was sentenced to two terms of four to ten years imprisonment and one term
[ 288 Pa. Super. Page 234]
of fifteen years probation, all to run concurrently. Appellant now claims that he is entitled to a new trial because certain inculpatory statements, allegedly obtained as a result of his illegal arrest, were impermissibly admitted into evidence at trial.*fn4 See U.S.Const. Amend. IV; Pa.Const. Art. 1, § 8; Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 83 S.Ct. 407, 9 L.Ed.2d 441 (1963). For the reasons stated herein, we disagree and thus affirm the judgment of sentence.
The circumstances giving rise to appellant's arrest, as disclosed at the suppression hearing, are as follows. Acting pursuant to a warrant, Detective John Romano arrested Clifford Branch for his alleged participation in two robberies of a McDonalds restaurant located at Broad and Vine Streets in Philadelphia. At the time of his arrest, Branch gave a statement in which he admitted his involvement in the crimes and also implicated appellant as a co-felon. Specifically, Branch told the police that "Jinx" was a participant in the robberies and that Jinx "hung out" with Robert Moore, another co-defendant, between the 1400 and 1600 blocks of Susquehanna Avenue.
On the basis of this information, Detective Romano began to patrol the area identified by Branch as Jinx's "hangout." He questioned residents whether they knew an individual known as Jinx who was a friend of Robert Moore and who was often in that neighborhood. The detective subsequently received information concerning Jinx's whereabouts from a phone caller who had earlier informed Romano that he knew Moore and his friend, Jinx.*fn5 When Detective Romano arrived at the specified location, however, no one was there. The next night, the informant called again, stating that Jinx was at the corner of Carlisle Street and Susquehanna Avenue*fn6
[ 288 Pa. Super. Page 235]
wearing a new brown cashmere coat. Detective Romano went to the corner identified by the caller and observed a group of males, all of whom were wearing fatigue-type jackets, with the exception of appellant, who was wearing a new-looking gray wool coat. The detective approached appellant, whose identity was unknown at this time, and asked, "Jinx?" Appellant replied "yes" and was thereupon placed under arrest. After he was given standard ...