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. WILLIAM E. DAVIS (12/29/81)

filed: December 29, 1981.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
v.
WILLIAM E. DAVIS, APPELLANT



No. 180 Philadelphia, 1980, Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, Philadelphia County, Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, Nos. 799-800 January Term, 1979.

COUNSEL

Joyce S. Mozenter, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Brosky, Johnson and Popovich, JJ. Johnson, J., concurs in the result.

Author: Popovich

[ 293 Pa. Super. Page 449]

Appellant, William Davis, was found guilty before a judge, sitting without a jury, of criminal conspiracy, burglary, and theft by unlawful taking or disposition. Post-verdict motions were denied, and appellant was sentenced to concurrent terms of one to three years imprisonment. This appeal followed. We affirm.

Before this Court, appellant raises issues concerning the identification evidence which linked him to the crime. Appellant does not argue that the prosecution failed to establish one of the elements of the crime of burglary; rather, he claims that the evidence was insufficient to establish his identity as one of the perpetrators of the crime. We cannot agree for the reasons herein stated.

The record at trial established the following:

On December 16, 1978, the victim, Oscar Squire, and a companion returned to his apartment at approximately 12:00 midnight, which was forty-five minutes after his initial departure. The victim noticed that the lights in his apartment had been turned on, and that music was playing. Upon entering, the victim saw two strangers in his apartment; immediately, he yelled for both of them to leave. These individuals then ran through the bedroom, through the kitchen and out the back door.

The victim's testimony continued and set forth the following scenario:

[Prosecution] "Which way did they run, Mr. Squire?

[The Witness] They ran through the bedroom, through the kitchen, out the back door.

[ 293 Pa. Super. Page 450]

Q So I understand, are there two doors to your apartment?

A Yes. There is a door from the hallway of the apartment building into the apartment and then there is a back door which leads out to the porch, which is the back of the building. The apartment is on the first floor.

Q Now, in order for the defendant to have gotten from the living room to the kitchen, would he have to pass you at the front door?

A No. There is an immediately [sic] hallway when you walk into the apartment which goes into the kitchen and at the other end of the hallway leads into the living room. The living room has two doors. One for the hallway; one for the bedroom. The bedroom is between the living room and kitchen. So, there's a doorway there. So, you can leave the living room, come through the bedroom, through the kitchen and out the back door, or your can come down the hallway, pass around the bedroom into the kitchen and out the back door.

Q Which way did the defendant go?

A They came through the bedroom, through the kitchen and out the back door.

Q Did he pass you through the kitchen out ...


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.