stating that appellant presents a substantial question when he alleges that the sentencing court did not adequately set forth its reasons for the sentence on the record
How later courts described this case
- stating that appellant presents a substantial question when he alleges that the sentencing court did not adequately set forth its reasons for the sentence on the record
- finding that appellant presented substantial question when he alleged that sentencing court did not adequately set forth its reasons on record for sentence imposed
- concluding an allegation that the sentencing court did not adequately set forth its reasons on the record presents a substantial question
- finding substantial question where court failed to place its reasons on the record for imposing an allegedly excessive sentence
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DEL SOLE, J.,
concurring and dissenting.
¶ 1 I join Judge Joyce in finding that 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 9714 is constitutional and in vacating the second fife sentence. However, I would also vacate the first life sentence and remand for resentencing. While the trial court has the discretion to impose a life sentence there must first be a determination that this sentence is necessary to protect public safety. The burden is on the Commonwealth to establish the threat at the sentencing hearing. Commonwealth v. Williams, 557 Pa. 285 , 733 A.2d 593 (1999), Commonwealth v. Halye, 719 A.2d 763 (Pa.Super.1998).
¶ 2 Here based on his pleas, the defendant was facing potential consecutive sentences with a minimum penalty of over fifty years and a maximum penalty of over one hundred years. There is no finding nor any testimony that this sentence is insufficient to protect the public. I would require such.
¶ 3 A trial court’s discretion in imposing sentence is not without limitation, and the exercise of that discretion must have a *737 reasonable relationship to the evidence presented at the sentencing hearing.