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.

MARK WASHINGTON v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (04/15/83)

decided: April 15, 1983.

MARK WASHINGTON, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA BOARD OF PROBATION AND PAROLE, RESPONDENT



Original jurisdiction in the case of Mark Washington v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole.

COUNSEL

John R. Merrick, Public Defender of Chester County, with him Alan Lourie, Assistant Public Defender, for petitioner.

Arthur R. Thomas, Assistant Chief Counsel, with him Robert A. Greevy, Chief Counsel, Jay C. Waldman, General Counsel, and LeRoy S. Zimmerman, Attorney General, for respondent.

Judges Rogers, Craig and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.

Author: Rogers

[ 73 Pa. Commw. Page 433]

Mark Washington (petitioner) has appealed from an order of the Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole (board) revoking his parole and recommitting him as a technical parole violator for violating conditions of his parole.

The petitioner challenges the sufficiency of the evidence; specifically, he contends that the board revoked his parole based on hearsay testimony and that excluding the hearsay testimony the remaining evidence of record is insufficient to support the board's decision to revoke his parole. He also asserts that the board erred by considering an earlier summary conviction in determining whether to recommit him as a technical parole violator because the notice of charges did not include the summary conviction.

Our review is limited to a determination of whether the adjudication is supported by substantial evidence, is in accordance with law and observant of the

[ 73 Pa. Commw. Page 434]

    petitioner's constitutional rights. 2 Pa. C.S. ยง 704. See Bronson v. Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole, 421 Pa. 549, 421 A.2d 1021 (1980).

The petitioner was charged with violating two conditions of his parole; that he refrain from owning or possessing any firearms or other weapons and that he refrain from any assaultive behavior.*fn1 In support of its contention that petitioner violated these two conditions the board stated in its notice of charges that:

On 2/12/82 you had in your possession a dangerous/offense weapon (knife). A Violation of Condition #5B.

On 2/12/82 you allegedly stabbed Jonas Hampton inside the Princes' Tavern, 225 High St., Phoenixville, Pa. ...


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.