Com. v. Tookes

• Decision Date: 22 September 1975
• Citation: 344 A.2d 576,236 Pa.Super. 386
• Parties: COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Tommie TOOKES, Appellant.
• Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court

Page 576

344 A.2d 576

236 Pa.Super. 386

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Tommie TOOKES, Appellant.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Sept. 22, 1975.

Vincent J. Ziccardi, Defender, John W. Packel, Chief, Appeals Div., Philadelphia, for appellant.

Steven H. Goldblatt, Asst. Dist. Atty., Chief, Appeals Div., Philadelphia, for appellee.

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

VAN der VOORT, Judge:

At approximately 9:00 P.M., on April 15, 1974, Officer Gale Clements of the Philadelphia Police Force was on patrol with his partner, Officer Dembeck, when a call came over the police radio that a burglary was in progress at Frank's Luncheonette, 13'th and Wood Streets. The call included the following description of the burglar: Negro male wearing a red knit hat and brown leather coat, and carrying a large object. Proceeding toward the area of 13'th and Wood Streets, the police officers came upon appellant Tommie Tookes approximately 3 blocks from the scene of the burglary, between 5 and 10 minutes after receiving the radio call. Appellant, a Negro male, was wearing a red knit hat and a brown coat, was carrying a large (22 1/2 by 8 1/2 by 9 ) radio (later identified as having been taken from the luncheonette), and was walking in a direction away from the scene of the burglary. The police officers arrested appellant and transported him back to the scene of the burglary and then to the police station. Appellant was tried on June 13, 1974, by a judge sitting without a jury, was convicted of burglary, and was sentenced on July 24, 1974 to ten years probation. Appellant made a timely motion to suppress all evidence obtained by the police in conjunction with the arrest, and is challenging in this appeal the refusal of the lower court judge to suppress the physical evidence (the radio) obtained as the 'fruit' of his allegedly illegal arrest.

Whether or not an arrest is constitutionally valid depends upon whether at the moment the arrest is made the arresting police officers have probable cause to make the arrest--whether at the time of the arrest the facts and circumstances within the knowledge of the arresting officers, and of which they have reasonably trustworthy information, are sufficient to warrant a man of reasonable caution in believing that the suspect has committed or is committing a crime. Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89, 91, 85 S.Ct. 223, 13 L.Ed.2d 142 (1964); Commonwealth v. Murray, 437 Pa. 326, 329, 263 A.2d 886 (1970); Commonwealth v. Brayboy, 431 Pa. 365,...