![]() Whether the court erred and abused its discretion by allowing certain testimony to come in pertaining to Pennsylvania State Attorney Drug Agent, David Seda's involvements at the Erie County Office of Adult Probation whereas this clearly violated the Fifth (5th), Sixth (6th) and Fourteenth (14th) Amendment rights in violation of the federal Constitution, and violations of the Pennsylvania state Constitution. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion, where the court would not allow defense counsel to object to certain Commonwealth evidence. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion by overruling an objection by defense counsel, where a question of the value of said illegal drugs arose. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion by instructing the jury on liability for conduct of an accomplice, where the Commonwealth never indicated in its bill of particulars that it was proceeding under accomplice liability for a conviction of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion by refusing to hear oral motion in limine, where counsel requested the Commonwealth be precluded from pursuing a conviction for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance under the theory of accomplice liability since the Commonwealth never indicated this in its bill of particulars that it would be proceeding under that certain theory. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion, whereas the amended omnibus pre-trial motion which included motions to suppress, motions for sanctions against the Commonwealth and motion to dismiss. Whether the court erred and abused its discretion by failing to grant motion to dismiss, where based upon excessive and prejudicial delay between the criminal indictment and the arrest of the. The instant timely appeal followed raising sixteen issues for our consideration: ![]() Judge Joyce directed counsel to provide a concise statement of matters complained of on appeal pursuant to Pa.R.A.P., Rule 1925(b). Represented by new counsel, appellant filed a notice of appeal on June 25, 1993. However, the trial judge denied relief, and on June 25, 1993, sentenced appellant to serve a term of five (5) to ten (10) years imprisonment and pay a fine of $30,000 for the drug offense, with a consecutive term of incarceration of one (1) to three (3) years for criminal conspiracy. Placidi filed a motion for a new trial and/or arrest of judgment on May 21, 1993. The jury found appellant guilty of both criminal conspiracy and possession with intent to deliver. Consequently, *22 Judge Connelly refused to consider the omnibus motion.Īppellant was brought to trial May 10, 1993, before the Honorable Michael T. ![]() On that date, the trial court found that defense counsel had not properly filed the amended omnibus pre-trial motion with the court administrator in accordance with Erie County local rules and procedure. The Honorable Shad Connelly granted a rule to show cause on the omnibus pre-trial motion and scheduled a hearing for the morning of May 3, 1993. Placidi then filed several motions, including a request for a bill of particulars and an amended omnibus pre-trial motion containing a suppression request, a motion to dismiss due to excessive and prejudicial delay, and requests for discovery. The trial court granted this request on March 29, 1993. However, appellant subsequently moved to withdraw his guilty plea. On March 3, 1993, the trial court accepted appellant's guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to deliver, and the Commonwealth agreed to nolle prosse a charge of criminal conspiracy. Brabender filed an initial omnibus pre-trial motion on appellant's behalf. Brabender, Jr., Esquire represented appellant through the preliminary hearing stage of the proceedings. Although the events leading to appellant's arrest occurred on May 7, 1991, the Commonwealth did not file any charges until June 25, 1992.ĭaniel J. Appellant agreed to supply the narcotics agent with cocaine and was subsequently discovered to be in possession of 27.1 grams of this substance. At that time, he met an undercover narcotics investigator posing as an individual on probation. ![]() We affirm.Īppellant was on probation in May of 1991. This is a direct appeal from the judgment of sentence entered after a jury found appellant, Pablo Montalvo, guilty of one count each of possession with intent to deliver cocaine and criminal conspiracy. *21 Before OLSZEWSKI, TAMILIA and CERCONE, JJ. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |