Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Commonwealth v. Thomas

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 20, 1985No. 1166Published

1Concurrence

WIEAND, Judge:

I join Part I of the majority’s opinion and concur in vacating the separate sentence imposed for robbery. I concur in Part II solely because I am compelled to do so by the decision of the Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Tarver, 493 Pa. 320, 426 A.2d 569 (1981). I am of the opinion, however, that Tarver should be reconsidered. In my best judgment, the crimes of robbery and murder committed by appellant in this case were distinct and discrete offenses; the former was not a necessary ingredient of the latter; and principles of double jeopardy do not prevent separate sentences for…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. TarverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Fitzgerald v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1982
  3. Koza v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1984
  4. McCampbell v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1982
  5. State v. CloseMontana Supreme Court · 1981

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API