Commonwealth v. Borrin
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentJustice Eakin
I must respectfully dissent. First, I find the dispositional memorandum prepared by the clerk after sentencing to be less than a “court order” such as trumps the unambiguous sentence pronounced in court. Secondly, even if it was a court order, I find the errors therein to be patent and correctable. Put another way, I find the sentence as announced to be unambiguous, as the trial judge clearly stated each relevant sentence was to run consecutively; therefore, the additions to the sentence made on an inter-office form comprised a patent error which the trial court was empowered to correct.
The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Insurance Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Trizechahn Gateway LLC v. TitusSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Commonwealth v. IsabellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Brosovic v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.