# Commonwealth v. Brunner

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · July 22, 1983 · 502 Pa. 358

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6263039

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Larry BRUNNER
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 22, 1983
- **Citations:** 502 Pa. 358; 466 A.2d 991; 1983 Pa. LEXIS 837
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Hutchinson
- **Judges:** Files, Hutchinson
- **Cited by:** 2 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/6263039

## Opinion text

HUTCHINSON, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent. The initial factor which must be considered in determining whether there are reasonable grounds for counsel’s actions is whether the claim is of arguable merit. Commonwealth v. Hubbard, 472 Pa. 259 , 372 A.2d 687 (1977). I fail to see how the witness’s reference in this case to a co-defendant’s prior unrelated criminal conduct so prejudices petitioner as to require a new trial. Since petitioner has failed to provide an adequate basis to establish that a motion for a mistrial would have arguable merit, I would not remand for an inquiry into trial counsel’s decision not to pursue the matter. See Commonwealth v. Hubbard, supra.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6263039. Public record. Not legal advice.