Com. v. Williams
| Decision Date | 13 April 1978 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Eileen L. WILLIAMS, Appellant. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
Bertram B. Leopold, and Leopold & Eberhardt, Altoona, for appellant.
Thomas G. Peoples, Jr., Dist. Atty., Hollidaysburg, for Commonwealth, appellee.
Before WATKINS, President Judge, and JACOBS, HOFFMAN, CERCONE, PRICE, VAN der VOORT and SPAETH, JJ.
Appellant contends that she was improperly charged and convicted of the crime of theft by unlawful taking 1 rather than retail theft 2. She bases this contention on the theory that the enactment of Section 3929 of the Crimes Code 3 indicates a legislative intent to preclude prosecution under Section 3921 4 for the theft of retail merchandise. We deem this issue waived and, therefore, affirm.
Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure 304 provides that a defendant may file a pretrial application to quash an indictment to attack a defect therein. In the absence of extraordinary circumstances, indictments containing defects not formal or not apparent on the face of the document should be attacked by pretrial application. The orderly administration of justice requires that the resources expended in conducting trials not be wasted by the post trial assertion of claims of which the defense should be aware prior to trial. Commonwealth ex rel. Banks v. Myers, 423 Pa. 124, 128, 222 A.2d 880, 882 (1966). Rule 305 5 mandates that such an application shall be made not less than ten days before trial unless the opportunity did not exist, or the defendant or the defense attorney was not aware of the grounds for the application. Appellant failed to avail herself of this procedure and may not now be heard to claim that the indictment was improper. Commonwealth v. Brown, 462 Pa. 578, 342 A.2d 84 (1975). See Pa.R.Crim.P. 304(e).
Affirmed.
WATKINS, former President Judge, did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.
3 Id.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commonwealth v. Boerner
...the same attack on the validity of the underlying convictions as the claim we previously found waived in part III under Commonwealth v. Williams, supra, for failure to raise it in pre-trial motion to quash the informations charging crimes other than retail theft. [5] Appellant cannot avoid ......
-
Com. v. Boerner
...and conspiracy. Therefore the trial judge properly found the claim waived by failure to raise it pre-trial. Commonwealth v. Williams, 252 Pa.Super. 587, 384 A.2d 935 Appellant claims that his being sentenced for retail theft, theft by unlawful taking and criminal conspiracy violated: (A) th......
-
Com. v. Harper
...a waiver of his right to assert this impropriety in any subsequent proceeding. Pa.R.Crim.P. 306(e). See Commonwealth v. Williams, 252 Pa.Super. 587, 384 A.2d 935 (1978). In any event, appellant did not raise this issue in his Post Conviction Hearing Act petition, or in his amended petition ......
-
Com. v. Lawson
...on both occasions it had been waived. See, Commonwealth v. Boerner, 281 Pa.Super. 505, 422 A.2d 583 (1981); Commonwealth v. Williams, 252 Pa.Super. 587, 384 A.2d 935 (1978). Here, however, the issue has not been waived. Appellant objected to the Commonwealth's motion for leave to add the ch......