Commonwealth v. Hamilton

SPAETH, President Judge:

This is an appeal from judgments of sentence for arson 1 and burglary. 2 Appellant argues that the Commonwealth did not establish, on the arson charge, that the fire was of incendiary origin and that appellant set the fire, and on the burglary charge, that appellant entered the house to commit a crime. We find the evidence sufficient to support both convictions. However, because the sentences are inconsistent as recorded, they are vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing.

-1-

To be sufficient to support a conviction of arson, the evidence must establish that…