From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Com. v. Gamble

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 18, 1977
369 A.2d 892 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1977)

Opinion

Submitted December 30, 1975.

Decided February 18, 1977.

Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Montgomery County, Crim. No. 1025 Jan. Term, 1973 and 680 April Term, 1973, Cirillo, J.

Calvin S. Drayer, Jr., Assistant Public Defender, Norristown, for appellant.

J. David Bean and Stewart J. Greenleaf, Assistant District Attorneys, Norristown, for appellee.

Before WATKINS, President Judge, and JACOBS, HOFFMAN, CERCONE, PRICE, VAN der VOORT and SPAETH, JJ.


Appellant claims that he was denied due process in probation revocation proceedings because he was not given written notice of the alleged probation violations. See Commonwealth v. Stratton, 235 Pa. Super. 566, 344 A.2d 636 (1975).

The Commonwealth argues that appellant waived this claim by his failure to object to the lack of notice at the time of the hearing. We have held that such failure does not constitute waiver. Commonwealth v. Stratton, supra; Commonwealth v. Henderson, 234 Pa. Super. 498, 340 A.2d 483 (1975); Commonwealth v. Alexander, 232 Pa. Super. 57, 331 A.2d 836 (1974). The Commonwealth also argues that appellant was not prejudiced by the lack of written notice because he heard all of the charges against him at his Gagnon I hearing, which was held "just minutes before the Gagnon II hearing commenced." We held in Commonwealth v. Stratton, supra, that lack of written notice vitiates a Gagnon II hearing even when a defendant has been afforded a separate and correct Gagnon I hearing. The defendant in Stratton received better notice of the charges against him than did appellant in the present case.

In fact, both hearings appear to have been part of the same proceeding. Under our decision in Commonwealth v. Davis, 234 Pa. Super. 31, 336 A.2d 616 (1975), one proceeding may be sufficient, provided that the other, specific due process requirements of Gagnon I and II are met.

The judgment of sentence is reversed and the case remanded with instructions to hold a new probation revocation hearing consistent with this opinion.

Appellant also challenges the adequacy of his guilty plea colloquy on the conviction that underlies his sentence of probation. He did not appeal this conviction and therefore has waived this claim. Commonwealth v. Gilmore, 465 Pa. 202, 348 A.2d 425 (1975).

CERCONE, J., dissents on the basis of Commonwealth v. Kile, 237 Pa. Super. 72, 346 A.2d 793 (1975).

JACOBS, J., dissents.


Summaries of

Com. v. Gamble

Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Feb 18, 1977
369 A.2d 892 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1977)
Case details for

Com. v. Gamble

Case Details

Full title:COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Charles GAMBLE, Appellant

Court:Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Date published: Feb 18, 1977

Citations

369 A.2d 892 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1977)
369 A.2d 892

Citing Cases

Commonwealth v. Ballard

On several occasions we have vacated lower court orders revoking probation because of the failure to supply…