Commonwealth v. Sakal

OPINION

Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree after a jury trial. In this appeal,1 appellant argues that the trial court’s instruction to the jury concerning the weight and sufficiency of lay testimony as to his sanity was erroneous. This contention has been waived. Pa.R.Crim.P. 1119(b). A review of the record also shows that appellant’s other assignments of error2 are without merit.

*622Finally, we have reviewed the record pursuant to our statutory .obligation3 and have determined that the evidence was sufficient to warrant the jury’s verdict.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.. We hear…