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. CLARENCE WALKER (04/23/82)

filed: April 23, 1982.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CLARENCE WALKER, APPELLANT



No. 2242 Philadelphia, 1980, Appeal from judgment of Sentence of the Court of Common Pleas, Trial Division, Criminal Section of the County of Philadelphia at Nos. 1992, 1995, 1996, 1998-2020, 2027-2040, 2049-2132, 2136-2176, September Term, 1979

COUNSEL

Louis S. Criden, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Jane C. Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for appellee.

Beck, Watkins and Hoffman, JJ.

Author: Beck

[ 298 Pa. Super. Page 390]

Pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 903(a)*fn1 and 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4701(a)(3),*fn2 Appellant was charged with and, in a non-jury trial, convicted of multiple counts of criminal conspiracy and bribery*fn3 in connection with his former employment with the Sanitation Division of the Philadelphia Department of Streets. Subsequently, Appellant's post-verdict motions were denied, and two concurrent sentences of six to twenty-three months incarceration were imposed for the three counts of conspiracy and for three counts of bribery. Additionally, for the remaining counts of bribery, Appellant received seven years probation which was to run concurrently with the aforementioned sentences of imprisonment and which was conditioned upon restitution and payment of a fine. This is a direct appeal from the judgment of sentence. We affirm.

[ 298 Pa. Super. Page 391]

Before this Court Appellant argues, alternatively, (a) that his prosecution was untimely; (b) that he was convicted under an unconstitutional statutory provision, and (c) that the court of common pleas abused its discretion in determining his sentence.

Appellant contends that his prosecution is barred by the time limitation of 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 108(c)(2) which, Appellant maintains, prevents prosecution for a crime more than three years after the crime was committed.

"When the words of a statute are clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of it is not to be disregarded . . . ." 1 Pa.C.S.A. § 1921(b); Commonwealth v. Mumma, 489 Pa. 547, 414 A.2d 1026 (1980). "[T]he language of a statute must be construed according to common and approved usage, and where possible it should be interpreted in a manner so as to give effect to each and every provision of the Act." Commonwealth v. Hill, 481 Pa. 37, 42 n.6, 391 A.2d 1303, 1306 n.6 (1978); 1 Pa.C.S.A. § 1903.

Section 108(c)(2) of the Crimes Code states in pertinent part:

(c) If the period [for prosecution] prescribed in subsection (b) [five years within which to commence prosecution for certain offenses such as robbery; two years within which to commence prosecution of other offenses such as bribery] . . . has expired, a prosecution may nevertheless be commenced for:

(2) Any offense committed by a public . . . employe in . . . connection with his . . . employment at any time when the defendant is in public . . . employment or within two years thereafter, but in no case shall this paragraph extend 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.