No. 885 PHILADELPHIA, 1982, Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence in the Court of Common Pleas, Criminal Division, of Philadelphia County, No. 81-05-194 2/2.
David Zwanetz, Philadelphia, for appellant.
Jane Cutler Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.
McEwen, Hester and Lipez, JJ. Lipez, J., concurred in the result.
[ 324 Pa. Super. Page 495]
This is an appeal taken from a judgment of sentence filed February 24, 1982, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania. At that time, appellant, Albert Faust, was sentenced to not less than ten nor more than twenty years of imprisonment for burglary. It was further directed that the sentence was to run concurrently with sentences previously imposed on unrelated bills of information.
Prior to the imposition of sentence, appellant pled guilty to burglary. The burglary charge was the result of appellant's and Joseph Watson's unauthorized and forcible entry into the Beth Telfilath and Temple Beth Ami Synagogues in Philadelphia. The co-defendants removed Torah breastplates, Torah pointers, Torah crowns and a wine cup from these places of worship. These items were made of silver, and it was the co-defendants' intent to sell them to a third party who would in turn melt the silver and sell the transformed substance for profit.
Appellant and his co-defendant were apprehended in Delaware County by the Upper Darby Police Department. Once taken into custody, the co-defendants waived their constitutional rights and confessed to the burglaries. The stolen items were recovered from the trunk of the getaway automobile. The Upper Darby Police Department released the
[ 324 Pa. Super. Page 496]
felons to the custody of the Philadelphia Police Department in order that criminal proceedings could be instituted.
Following the entry of his guilty plea, appellant did not file a petition to withdraw that plea. Instead, he filed a petition for reconsideration of sentence, which was denied. This appeal followed.
Appellant's arguments can be paraphrased as follows:
1) The lower court erred in failing to suppress the stolen property found in the automobile on grounds that the warrantless search and seizure was illegal. Appellant complains that the Upper Darby police officers had ample opportunity prior to the arrest to secure arrest and search warrants. Through the aid of a confidential informant (appellant's brother), the arresting officers suspected appellant's complicity in unrelated burglaries two months prior to the arrest and were apprised of his participation in the instant matter and his whereabouts nearly one and one-half hours prior to the officers' pursuit. ...