Commonwealth v. Nelson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Nix:
While I agree with the majority’s view that only one sentence can be imposed under Bill No. 1253 even though that bill contained three separate counts, I disagree with the conclusion reached that counts (b) and (c) merged into count (a).
First it must be noted that since counts (b) and (c) describe conduct made criminal under the same statutory provision (Act of June 24, 1939, P. L. 872, §314, as amended, 18 P.S. §4314) only one penalty can be imposed even though a verdict of guilty is returned on both counts. Commonwealth v. Grosso, 192 Pa.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Shaddock v. AsheSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1941
- Commonwealth v. McCuskerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Commonwealth v. McCUSKERSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Commonwealth Ex Rel. Russo v. Ashe, WardenCourt of Judicial Discipline of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Commonwealth v. PHILLIPSSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.