Commonwealth v. Blagman

*438Concurring Opinion by

Mr. Justice Roberts :

I concur in the result. In my view, appellant has not properly preserved for appellate review the issue of an alleged violation of Pa. R. Crim. P. 118 (now 130).*

Although appellant’s initial suppression hearing was held before our decision in Commonwealth v. Futch, 447 Pa. 389, 290 A.2d 417 (1972), his trial began almost five months after Futeh was decided. Defense counsel had ample opportunity to move before trial for a new suppression hearing. Commonwealth v. Johnson, 457 Pa. 554, 558 & n.4, 327 A.2d 632, 634-35 & n.4 (1974). However, it was not…