# Commonwealth v. Harvin

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · October 4, 1985 · 346 Pa. Super. 575

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639240

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Byron HARVIN, A/K/A Willie Harvin, A/K/A Tim Harvin, A/K/A Willie Brown, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 4, 1985
- **Citations:** 346 Pa. Super. 575; 500 A.2d 98; 1985 Pa. Super. LEXIS 8857
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Wieand
- **Judges:** Spaeth, Rowley, Wieand
- **Cited by:** 11 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/9639240

## Opinion text

WIEAND, Judge,
concurring:
I agree with the majority that the trial court did not err when it denied appellant’s motion to quash the information. I also agree that appellant had notice of the offense for which he was to be tried, for the information charged specifically that his retail theft was a third or subsequent offense. A remand to determine the sufficiency of the Commonwealth’s evidence at the preliminary hearing to show a felony of the third degree is unnecessary. The appellant, on appeal, has not challenged the sufficiency of the evidence at trial and at the sentencing hearing to support a judgment of sentence for retail theft, a felony of the third degree. Because the evidence produced in the trial court was sufficient to establish appellant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the sufficiency of the evidence to establish a prima facie case at the preliminary hearing is now moot. See: Commonwealth v. Hess, 489 Pa. 580, 590 , 414 A.2d 1043, 1048 (1980) (Roberts, J., concurring); Commonwealth v. Thomas, 345 Pa.Super. 211, 215 , 497 A.2d 1379, 1381 (1985). See also: Commonwealth v. Krall, 452 Pa. 215, 219 , 304 A.2d 488, 490 (1973). Therefore, I agree that the judgment of sentence should be affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9639240. Public record. Not legal advice.