# Commonwealth v. Brown

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 3, 1990 · 400 Pa. Super. 316

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9711966

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Curtis BROWN, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 3, 1990
- **Citations:** 400 Pa. Super. 316; 583 A.2d 805; 588 A.2d 805; 1990 Pa. Super. LEXIS 3370
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hoffman
- **Judges:** Olszewski, Beck, Hoffman
- **Cited by:** 4 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/9711966

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that this two-prong inquiry applies “whenever a defendant claims he was incapable of making a valid waiver because of a mental or psychological defect”

## Opinion text

HOFFMAN, Judge,
concurring.
I join in Sections I and V of the opinion of my esteemed colleague, Judge Peter Paul Olszewski. I agree with the lead opinion that appellant was not subjected to custodial interrogation when he gave his incriminating statements and that the court below properly denied appellant’s motion to suppress. I also agree that the trial court’s sentence was neither excessive nor unreasonable.
I do not find it necessary to address the alternative holdings on the suppression claim, and thus I cannot join in Sections II and III. I also offer no opinion on the propriety of the court’s directing appellant to take the witness stand at the suppression hearing. Because the court struck this testimony, any question on the propriety of this procedure is now moot. Therefore, I cannot join in Section IV.
BECK, J., joins.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9711966. Public record. Not legal advice.