Com. v. Reid
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania |
| Writing for the Court | Before JONES; POMEROY |
| Citation | 326 A.2d 267,458 Pa. 357 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Alexander REID, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 16 October 1974 |
Page 267
v.
Alexander REID, Appellant.
Clarence B. Turns, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, Harrisburg, for appellant.
Rolf W. Bienk, Deputy Dist. Atty., Harrisburg, for appellee.
Before JONES, C.J., and EAGEN, O'BRIEN, ROBERTS, POMEROY, NIX and MANDERINO, JJ.
POMEROY, Justice.
Appellant, Alexander Reid, was convicted by a Dauphin County jury of murder in the second degree. [458 Pa. 358] The slaying in question was precipitated by an argument between Reid and Bernard Anderson, the victim, which took place in front of Reid's home; during the course of the altercation, appellant shot the victim with a small pistol. At trial, Reid claimed that Anderson had threatened to kill him and his companion, James Shavers, and was about to assault them with a brick; he denied any intent to kill Anderson. Following the denial of post-verdict motions, appellant was sentenced to pay a fine of one hundred dollars and undergo a term of imprisonment of not less than ten nor more than twenty years. This appeal followed.
Appellant asserts that his case was prejudiced by allegedly irrelevant testimony concerning a dispute between Shavers and Anderson which had occurred sometime earlier on the day of the slaying. 1 This issue, however, was not raised in support of appellant's motion in arrest of judgment and for a new trial. Accordingly, we will not consider it now. The swift and orderly
Page 268
administration of criminal justice requires that lower courts be given the opportunity to rectify their errors before they are considered on appeal. We have said many [458 Pa. 359] times that we will not review for the first time on appeal issues not properly raised and preserved in the trial court. Commonwealth v. Agie, 449 Pa. 187, 296 A.2d 741 (1972); Commonwealth v. Little, 449 Pa. 28, 295 A.2d 287 (1972); Commonwealth v. Donovan, 447 Pa. 450, 291 A.2d 116 (1972); Commonwealth v. Jacobs, 445 Pa. 364, 367, 284 A.2d 717 (1971); Commonwealth v. Bittner, 441 Pa. 216, 221, 272 A.2d 484, 487 (1971); Commonwealth v. Myers, 439 Pa. 381, 384--385, 266 A.2d 756 (1970).Judgment of sentence affirmed.
---------------
1 According to this testimony. Shavers chased Anderson down a street with a knife in his hand on the morning of the slaying. It appears from the record that this incident was first mentioned by a Commonwealth witness on cross-examination by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Mitchell
...of requiring strict application of the rules of waiver. See Commonwealth v. Clair, --- Pa. ---, 326 A.2d 272 (1974); Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 (1974); Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 [464 Pa. 124] Pa. 255, 322 A.2d 114 (1974); see also, Commonwealth v. Blai......
-
Com. v. Burchard
...only the immediate interest of the defendant but also the interest of facilitating effective appellate review. See Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 (1974). Even where the court en banc finds no reversible error, its review frequently serves to crystalize the issues and provid......
-
Com. v. Piper
...will not be considered on appeal. Any such error must, at the very latest, be raised in post-trial motions. Commonwealth v. Reid, Pa., 326 A.2d 267 (1974) (J. 2561); Commonwealth v. Agie, 449 Pa. 187, 296 A.2d 741 (1972). I am not aware, however, of any similar waiver rule with respect to e......
-
Com. v. Westbrook
...in post-verdicts motions, are waived. Commonwealth v. Blair, 460 Pa. 31, 33 n. 1, 331 A.2d 213, 214 n. 1 (1975); Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 (1974). In this case, because the PCHA hearing court granted leave to appeal to this court Nunc pro tunc rather than leave this co......
-
Com. v. Mitchell
...of requiring strict application of the rules of waiver. See Commonwealth v. Clair, --- Pa. ---, 326 A.2d 272 (1974); Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 (1974); Dilliplaine v. Lehigh Valley Trust Co., 457 [464 Pa. 124] Pa. 255, 322 A.2d 114 (1974); see also, Commonwealth v. Blai......
-
Com. v. Burchard
...only the immediate interest of the defendant but also the interest of facilitating effective appellate review. See Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 (1974). Even where the court en banc finds no reversible error, its review frequently serves to crystalize the issues and provid......
-
Com. v. Piper
...will not be considered on appeal. Any such error must, at the very latest, be raised in post-trial motions. Commonwealth v. Reid, Pa., 326 A.2d 267 (1974) (J. 2561); Commonwealth v. Agie, 449 Pa. 187, 296 A.2d 741 (1972). I am not aware, however, of any similar waiver rule with respect to e......
-
Com. v. Boone
...failed to voice any objection at time of trial, appellant cannot now, for the first time, raise this objection. See Commonwealth v. Reid, 458 Pa. 357, 326 A.2d 267 The final objection is that appellant was denied due process of law because she was given a minimum as well as maximum sentence......