# Commonwealth ex rel. Rambeau v. Rundle

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · March 16, 1973 · 455 Pa. 8

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260862

## Case

- **Full name:** Commonwealth ex rel. Rambeau v. Rundle Commonwealth v. Collins
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** March 16, 1973
- **Citations:** 455 Pa. 8; 314 A.2d 842; 1973 Pa. LEXIS 797
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Manderino
- **Judges:** Brien, Eagen, Jones, Manderino, Nix, Pomeroy, Roberts
- **Cited by:** 142 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260862

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that a defendant is entitled to the assistance of counsel -8- J-S15030-23 at his parole revocation hearing because the assistance of counsel is required at every stage of a criminal proceeding where substantial rights of a criminal accused may be affected
- rejecting claimed violations of constitutional protections against double jeopardy and bills of attainder

## Opinion text

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Manderino:
I concur in the majority except on the issue of a defendant’s right to credit for time spent on parole. Under no circumstances can a defendant be deprived of his freedom, either totally or partially, beyond a period of time equivalent to the maximum sentence imposed by judicial authority.
An individual who receives a maximum sentence and is never paroled serves only the maximum period and is not subjected to any partial limitation of his freedom for any period of time other than the maximum period.
An individual who is paroled for a period of time and then returned to serve the remaining balance of his maximum term fulfills his obligation of total incarceration for the maximum period originally authorized by his judgment of sentence and in addition has suffered the partial limitation of his freedom during the period of parole.
The cumulative effect constitutes a total penalty in excess of the maximum penalty originally imposed by the judgment of sentence. Such a result is without legislative or constitutional authority.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6260862. Public record. Not legal advice.