Commonwealth, Aplt. v. Armstrong, A.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 30, 2014

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2014-12-30

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently July 2018

2 state decisions

Relies on 2013 Pa. Super. 220 - Commonwealth v. Armstrong · Commonwealth v. Armstrong · Commonwealth v. Gaines

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-12-30

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2AND NOW, this 30th day of December, 2014, the Order of the Superior Court is AFFIRMED based on the reasoning set forth in its opinion addressing the issue on which this Court granted allowance of appeal, namely, “Does 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 9714(a)(2) require prior sentencing as a second strike offender to invoke the third-strike sentencing provision?” Commonwealth v. Armstrong, 623 Pa. 560, 83 A.3d 411 (2014); see Commonwealth v. Armstrong, 74 A.3d 228, 239-42 (Pa.Super.2013). We express no opinion concerning the Superior Court’s treatment of any other issue.

Former Justice McCAFFERY did not participate in the decision of this case.*622Chief Justice CASTILLE, Justices SAYLOR, BAER and TODD join the PER CURIAM affirmance based on the intermediate court’s analysis.Justice EAKIN files a dissenting statement in which Justice STEVENS joins.