Opinion
J-S14004-17 No. 948 MDA 2016
03-28-2017
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. ANTHONY BRUCE ALMODOVAR Appellant
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence May 13, 2016
In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County
Criminal Division at No(s): CP-36-CR-0004599-2015 BEFORE: GANTMAN, P.J., SHOGAN, J., and STRASSBURGER, J. MEMORANDUM BY GANTMAN, P.J.:
Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court. --------
Appellant, Anthony Bruce Almodovar, appeals from the judgment of sentence entered in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas, following his convictions for person not to possess a firearm, firearms not to be carried without a license, and two counts of possession of a controlled substance. We affirm.
18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6105(a)(1), 6106(a)(1), and 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(16), respectively.
The trial court opinion fully sets forth relevant facts and procedural history of this case. Therefore we have no need to restate them.
Appellant raises one issue for review:
DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN DENYING [APPELLANT]'S
MOTION TO SUPPRESS, WHERE POLICE POSSESSED NEITHER REASONABLE SUSPICION TO DETAIN [APPELLANT], NOR REASONABLE SUSPICION TO BELIEVE THAT HE WAS ARMED AND DANGEROUS, TO SUPPORT THEIR FRISK OF HIM?(Appellant's Brief at 4).
After a thorough review of the record, the briefs of the parties, the applicable law, and the well-reasoned opinion of the Honorable David L. Ashworth, we conclude Appellant's issue merits no relief. The trial court opinion comprehensively discusses and properly disposes of the question presented. ( See Trial Court Opinion, filed July 22, 2016, at 4-17) (finding: case involved multiple reports of shots fired as confirmed by recovery of shell casings at reported scene of shooting, which raised reasonable suspicion of criminal activity; reports also described possible suspect as younger black male wearing white t-shirt running from scene; while investigating person caught on camera near scene of shooting, Sergeant Stoltzfus also observed close to scene another person who fit reported description of light-skinned black male in white t-shirt; second subject was later identified as Appellant; Appellant appeared to be coming from scene of shooting and walked with limp, which suggested to Sergeant Stoltzfus that Appellant might have been injured in shooting incident; Sergeant Stoltzfus asked Officer Wolpert to investigate Appellant, who voluntarily stated he had firearm that Officer Wolpert recovered from Appellant's waistband; Appellant had no license for firearm; Appellant was arrested on outstanding bench warrant; during search incident to arrest, Officer Wolpert discovered Appellant was in possession of synthetic marijuana and heroin; under circumstances of this case, officers had reasonable suspicion to justify investigative detention of Appellant). The record supports the court's decision, and we affirm on the basis of the trial court opinion.
Judgment of sentence affirmed. Judgment Entered. /s/_________
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary Date: 3/28/2017
Image materials not available for display.