From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth v. Herbin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 3, 1974
323 A.2d 252 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1974)

Opinion

March 11, 1974.

April 3, 1974.

Criminal law — Practice — Sentence — Discretion of lower court — Appellate review.

An appellate court, in reviewing the sentence imposed by a lower court after a voluntary guilty plea in a case within the court's jurisdiction, where the sentence falls clearly within the prescribed statutory limits for the crime in question, will only disturb the sentencing if there has been an abuse of the broad discretion vested in the lower court in sentencing matters.

Before WATKINS, P.J., JACOBS, HOFFMAN, CERCONE, PRICE, VAN DER VOORT, and SPAETH, JJ.

Appeal, No. 129, March T., 1974, from judgment of sentence of Court of Common Pleas of York County, Aug. T., 1973, No. 66, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Lester F. Herbin, Sr. Judgment of sentence affirmed.

Indictment charging defendant with robbery. Before BLAKEY, III, J.

Plea of guilty entered and judgment of sentence entered thereon. Defendant appealed.

John H. Chronister and Hugh S. Rebert, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant.

Richard H. Horn, Assistant District Attorney, Morrison B. Williams, First Assistant District Attorney, and Donald L. Reihart, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.


Submitted March 11, 1974.


This is an appeal challenging the lower court's judgment of sentence after the appellant pleaded guilty to a charge of robbery. Following this plea, the lower court ordered a pre-sentence investigation prior to the pronouncement of sentence. Following that investigation, appellant was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of not less than three nor more than six years.

The record reveals that the appellant committed the crime in question while on a weekend pass from a treatment center, to which he had been committed after an earlier robbery conviction. At the sentencing hearing in the instant case, the lower court took due note of an alcoholism problem for which the appellant blames his present and past legal difficulties.

When we are called upon to review the sentence imposed by a lower court after a voluntary guilty plea in a case within the court's jurisdiction and that sentence falls clearly within the prescribed statutory limits for the crime in question, we can only disturb the sentencing if we find an abuse of the broad discretion vested in the lower courts in sentencing matters. Commonwealth v. Person, 450 Pa. 1, 297 A.2d 460 (1972); Commonwealth v. Zelnick, 202 Pa. Super. 129, 195 A.2d 171 (1963), cert. denied, 377 U.S. 1006 (1964). In the instant case, where the sentence was far less severe than the possible statutory maximum penalty, we find no abuse of discretion by the lower court under the circumstances here present and hereby affirm the judgment of sentence.


Summaries of

Commonwealth v. Herbin

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Apr 3, 1974
323 A.2d 252 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1974)
Case details for

Commonwealth v. Herbin

Case Details

Full title:Commonwealth v. Herbin, Appellant

Court:Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Apr 3, 1974

Citations

323 A.2d 252 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1974)
323 A.2d 252