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. DARNELL MATHEWS (03/26/84)

submitted: March 26, 1984.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
DARNELL MATHEWS, APPELLANT



NO. 01389 PITTSBURGH 1982, Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal No. 7901975A

COUNSEL

Richard S. Levine, Assistant Public Defender, Pittsburgh, for appellant.

Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, Pittsburgh, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Spaeth, President Judge, and Brosky and Montgomery, JJ.

Author: Spaeth

[ 337 Pa. Super. Page 93]

While on probation for a 1979 conviction, appellant was convicted of receiving stolen property. A probation revocation hearing was held, probation was revoked, and appellant was sentenced to 1-5 years for the 1979 conviction. On appeal, appellant's only argument is that the trial court did not adequately state its reasons for the sentence imposed. We agree and therefore reverse and remand for resentencing.

[ 337 Pa. Super. Page 94]

When a trial court imposes sentence following revocation of probation, it must state its reasons on the record. Commonwealth v. Aldinger, 292 Pa. Super. 149, 436 A.2d 1196 (1981). The reasons stated should reflect the court's consideration of the criteria of the Sentencing Code, 42 Pa.C.S. ยง 9701 et seq., the circumstances of the offense, and the character of the offender. Commonwealth v. DeLuca, 275 Pa. Super. 176, 418 A.2d 669 (1980). Although the sentencing court need not list and address each of the criteria of the Sentencing Code, Commonwealth v. Zimmerman, 282 Pa. Super. 286, 422 A.2d 1119 (1980), the record must reflect that the criteria were considered. Commonwealth v. DeLuca, supra.

The trial court gave the following reasons for its sentence:

The defendant has a very bad record, and we gave him a break the last time. He was found guilty as indicted, and he was placed on probation for a period of time, five years, on an offense that was a felony of the third degree. And he had violated his probation.

So we gave him the chance there. And he was new to the system at the time we did that.

However, at this point in time, there comes a time when we feel we had ought to get rid of the probation office for giving us bum advice, or we ought to pay attention to them giving us advice that we perhaps from time to time ignore because we give in to the pleadings of counsel or the defendant.

It's not that we get any pleasure sending people to jail when we don't learn otherwise. There has to be some solution other than goin[g] out, come back in the program, leaving ...


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.