# Commonwealth v. Tessel

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · October 25, 1985 · 347 Pa. Super. 37

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639151

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Detlev TESSEL, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 25, 1985
- **Citations:** 347 Pa. Super. 37; 500 A.2d 144; 1985 Pa. Super. LEXIS 9767
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Beck
- **Judges:** Spaeth, Beck, Tamilia
- **Cited by:** 25 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/9639151

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that in Rieland, “the confession was also admissible to prove the commission of the inchoate crime of criminal conspiracy, despite the lack of any common element, because the crimes of burglary and conspiracy arose from a common transaction”
- stating that “while a defendant may be charged with and adjudged guilty of both burglary and theft, he may not be sentenced for both crimes.”

## Opinion text

BECK, Judge,
concurring:
I join Judge Spaeth’s opinion with the exception of that portion relating to suspended sentences. Use of suspended sentences in this Commonwealth has been subject to varying interpretations. In my view it would be best to have the issue squarely before the court and briefed before determining whether to abandon its use, as Judge Spaeth would have us do, or to retain its use, as Judge Tamilia would have us do. I therefore would refrain from deciding the issue since it was not raised by the parties.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639151. Public record. Not legal advice.