text:
    443 A.2d 400
    Weinstock, Appellant v. Weinstock.
    January 21, 1981.
    Elliot B. Edley, for appellant;
    Joseph J. Savitz, for appellee.

      Before HESTER, POPOVICH and DiSALLE, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

DiSALLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    March 26, 1982.
    443 A.2d 400
    Bozich v. Gladish, etc., Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Aug. 30, 1982.
    Submitted April 15, 1981.
    Arthur M. Wilson, for appellant;
    W. Bryan Pizzi, for appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, CIRILLO and JOHNSON, JJ.
   Order of lower court is hereby affirmed.


text:
    446 A.2d 666
    Commonwealth v. Bancroft, Appellant.
    Reargument Denied June 11, 1982.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Aug. 30, 1982.
    Argued November 17, 1981.
    Jean B. Green, for appellant, Joe Hylare, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., McEWEN and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence of the lower court is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 401
    Commonwealth v. Boyd, Jr., Appellant.
    Argued September 10, 1980.
    Neil E. Jokelson, for appellant;
    Michele Golfarb, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., WICKERSHAM and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 401
    Commonwealth v. Cottrell, Appellant.
    Submitted April 6, 1981.
    Elaine DeMasse, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant Gaele McLaughlin Bart-hold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 401
    Commonwealth v. Cunningham, Appellant.
    Submitted April 14, 1981.
    David P. Brandt, for appellant;
    Oliver J. Lobaugh, Assistant District Attorney, for Commoftwealth, appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, CIRILLO and JOHNSON, JJ.
   The judgment of sentence and order of the court below is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 402
    Commonwealth v. Daniel, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 14, 1982.
    Argued February 3, 1981.
    Michael F. X. Coll, for appellant;
    Michael H. Ranck, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, POPOVICH and WATKINS, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 402
    Commonwealth v. Frederick, Appellant.
    Submitted October 20, 1981.
    Kevin H. Way, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Kenneth Brown, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before BECK, WATKINS and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 402
    Commonwealth v. Grant, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied June 1, 1982.
    Argued April 30, 1981.
    John A. Clay, for appellant;
    Edward Tocci, District Attorney, submitted a brief on behalf of Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., BROSKY and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 402
    Commonwealth v. Harris, Appellant.
    Submitted September 11, 1980.
    Robert Lee Moore, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    George C. Yatron, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 403
    Commonwealth v. Hazeltine, Appellant.
    Submitted February 3,1981.
    Albert J. Flora, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Chester B. Muroski, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, POPOVICH and WATKINS, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 403
    Commonwealth v. Heller, Sr., Appellant.

      Argued February 23, 1981.
    Henry T. Crocker, for appellant;
    Ronald T. Williamson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, WIEAND and JOHNSON, JJ.
   The judgment of sentence is affirmed.

WIEAND, J., filed a memorandum concurring statement.

SPAETH, J., filed a memorandum dissenting statement.


text:
    443 A.2d 403
    Commonwealth v. Hund, Appellant.
    Submitted September 9, 1981.
    Thomas G. Klingensmith, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Michael H. Ranck, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, McEWEN and CIRILLO, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 404
    Commonwealth v. Hurley, Appellant.

      Argued November 16, 1981.
    William C. Costopoulos, for appellant;
    Michael Eakin, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., McEWEN and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   The judgment of sentence of the Tower court is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 404
    Commonwealth v. Isaac, Appellant.
    Submitted October 21, 1981.
    Charles A. Cunningham, for appellant;
    Jane C. Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before BECK, WATKINS and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 404
    Commonwealth v. Krall, Appellant.

      Submitted October 21, 1981.
    Arthur K. Dils, for appellant;
    William L. Thurston, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before BECK, WATKINS and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 404
    Commonwealth v. Mobley, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 16, 1982.
    Submitted September 9, 1981.
    Elaine DeMasse, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   The judgment of sentence is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 405
    Commonwealth v. Ralph, Sr., Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Aug. 30, 1982.

      Argued October 19, 1981.
    Gerald A. Stein, for appellant; Deborah Fox, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before BECK, WATKINS and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 405
    Commonwealth v. Ryons, Jr., Appellant.
    Submitted May 13, 1981.
    Ronald A. Smith, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 405
    Commonwealth v. Short, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 10, 1982.

      Submitted June 22, 1981.
    Richard L. Shoap, for appellant;
    John F. Nelson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before PRICE, BECK and JOHNSON, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 406
    Commonwealth v. Turner, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied July 21, 1982.
    Submitted February 9, 1981.
    William E. Stockey, for appellant;
    Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, for Commonwealth appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., BROSKY and CIRILLO, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 406
    Commonwealth v. Webster, Appellant. Commonwealth v. Manning, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied June 11, 1982.

      Submitted April 6, 1981.
    Vincent A. Couchara, for Webster, appellant (at No. 1953);
    Douglas M. Johnson, Assistant Public Defender, for Manning, appellant (at No. 1785);
    Ronald T. Williamson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 406
    Commonwealth v. Williams, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 10, 1982.
    Submitted December 16, 1981.
    George E. Lepley, Jr., Public Defender, for appellant;
    Kenneth Brown, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, BECK and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.

POPOVICH, J., concurred in the result.


text:
    443 A.2d 407
    Crown Central Petroleum Corp., Appellant v. Waldman.

      Submitted June 23, 1981.
    David Richman, for appellant; Lewis H. Markowitz, for appellee.
    Before PRICE, BECK and JOHNSON, JJ.
   The order of the Court of March 19, 1980, is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 407
    Darcy, Appellant v. Harmon, et al.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied June 1, 1982.
    Argued September 10, 1981.
    George J. O’Neill, for appellant;
    Allan Molotsky, for Harmon, appellee; Frederick E. Smith, for Hurncane, appellee;
    John J. Hart, for Lee, appellees.
    Before SPAETH, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   The judgment is affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 407
    Hess, et ux., Appellants v. Sasso.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Nov. 5, 1982.
    Argued November 11, 1980.
    Clyde T. Macvay, for appellants;
    H. N. Rosenberg, for appellee.
    Before SPAETH, WICKERSHAM and LIPEZ, JJ.
   Judgment affirmed.

SPAETH, J., concurred in the result.


text:
    443 A.2d 407
    Klein, Appellant v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Co., etc.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Aug. 20, 1982.
    Argued December 16, 1981.
    James Womer, for appellant;
    Frederick H. Krans, for appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, BECK and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 408
    Narehood v. Keiter, et al., Appellants.
    Argued January 6, 1982.
    John McCrea, for appellants;
    Bruce A. Grove, for appellee.
    Before SPAETH, CAVANAUGH and MONTEMURO, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 408
    W. H. Skillings, et al. v. Caudal Enterprises, Appellants.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied June 30, 1982.

      Argued November 16, 1981.
    John A. Eichman, for appellants;
    Gary M. Schildhorn, for appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., McEWEN and MONTEMURO, JJ.
   Appeal dismissed.


text:
    443 A.2d 408
    Spanovich et ux. v. Dinert, Appellant.
    Argued November 12, 1980.
    Paul D. Kruper, for appellant;
    Richard S. Crone, for appellees.
    Before CAVANAUGH, WATKINS and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Order and judgment affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 408
    Turner, Jr. v. Turner, Appellant.
    Submitted June 1, 1981.
    Norman M. Lubin, for appellant;
    John A. Felix, for appellee.
    Before ROWLEY, McEWEN and MONTEMURO, JJ.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    443 A.2d 409
    Zelie Construction Dist. Co., Appellant v. McAllister.
    Submitted November 12,1980.
    Leo M. Stepanian, for appellant;
    Richard L. Nygaard, for appellee.
    Before SPAETH, WICKERSHAM and LIPEZ, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

SPAETH, J., concurred in the result.


text:
    April 2, 1982.
    445 A.2d 194
    Apex Bldg. Prod. Co., Appellants v. Goffredo & Sons, Inc.
    Submitted May 13, 1981.
    Kevin J. Kelleher, for appellant;
    Domenic P. Sbrocchi, for appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 195
    Brinson, Appellant v. Brinson.
    Argued February 16, 1982.
    William F. Moran, for appellant;
    Charles James Fonzone, for appellee.
    Before JOHNSON, MONTEMURO and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   The order of Court of March 12, 1981, is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 195
    Bulkoski, Appellant v. Metropolitan Life Ins., etc. et al.
    Submitted April 14, 1981.
    Gary Kalmeyer, for appellant;
    Richard W. DiBalla, for appellees.
    Before CAVANAUGH, CIRILLO and JOHNSON, JJ.
   The order dated September 11, 1980 is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 195
    Carpino, Appellant v. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Aug. 4, 1982.

      Argued March 17, 1980.
    Drew S. Dorfman, for appellant;
    Landon Spencer, for appellee.
    Before HESTER, WICKERSHAM and LIPEZ, JJ.
   The order of the lower court is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 195
    Commonwealth v. Anderson, Appellant.
    Submitted January 21, 1981.
    Mitchell Scott Strutin, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, CIRILLO and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order and judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 196
    Commonwealth v. Baines, Appellant.
    Submitted December 15,1981.
    Jean C. Hemphill, for appellant;
    Jane C. Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, BECK and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

POPOVICH, J., concurred in the result.


text:
    445 A.2d 196
    Commonwealth v. Bakula, Appellant.
    Submitted May 13, 1981.
    Douglas M. Johnson, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Ronald T. Williamson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 196
    Commonwealth v. Bradby, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Granted July 20, 1982.
    Submitted February 18, 1981.
    Michael A. Klimpl, for appellant;
    Michael Kane, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before PRICE, MONTEMURO and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 196
    Commonwealth v. Brown, Appellant.
    Submitted April 15, 1981.
    John H. Corbett, Jr., for appellant;
    Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, CIRILLO and JOHNSON, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence entered May 29, 1980 is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 197
    Commonwealth v. Canada, Appellant.
    Submitted February 4, 1981.
    Arthur J. King, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Joseph A. Smyth, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, POPOVICH and WATKINS, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 197
    Commonwealth v. Carson a/k/a Brown, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Granted May 25, 1982.
    Submitted December 15, 1981.
    Burton A. Rose, for appellant;
    Jane C. Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, BECK and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 197
    Commonwealth v. Daniels, Appellant.
    Submitted May 20, 1981.
    M. Dan Mason, for appellant;
    David F. Mowrey, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before MONTGOMERY, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 198
    Commonwealth v. Drakeford, Appellant.
    Submitted March 11, 1981.
    Elaine DeMasse, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, ROWLEY and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 198
    Commonwealth v. Forbes, Appellant. Commonwealth v. O'Neill, Appellant.
    Submitted November 4, 1981.
    Jack M. Meyers, for Forbes, appellant;
    Thomas Q. Ciccone, Jr., for O’Neill, appellant;
    Paul S. Diamond, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before BROSKY, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 198
    Commonwealth v. Ginsburg, Appellant.
    Argued March 9,1981.
    D. Webster Keogh, for appellant;
    Joseph Hylan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, DiSALLE and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

DiSALLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    445 A.2d 199
    Commonwealth v. Gray, Appellant.
    Submitted May 13, 1981.
    Alan L. Butkovitz, for appellant;
    Maxine J. Stotland, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 199
    Commonwealth v. Hipszer, Appellant.
    Submitted May 11, 1981.
    Michael D. Marino, for appellant;
    David M. McGlaughlin, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 199
    Commonwealth v. Hoover, Appellant.
    Argued January 27, 1982.
    Leslie M. Fields, for appellant;
    J. Michael Eakin, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WIEAND, CIRILLO and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 199
    Commonwealth v. Kent a/k/a Wright, Appellants.
    Submitted January 19, 1982.
    Douglas M. Johnson, Public Defender, for appellant;
    Joseph A. Smyth, District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before JOHNSON, WATKINS and LIPEZ, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence dated May 8, 1981 is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 200
    Commonwealth v. Knighton, Appellant.
    Submitted March 10, 1981.
    Margaret H. Poswistilo, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Nicholas E. Englesson, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, ROWLEY and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 200
    Commonwealth v. Marshman, Appellant.

      Submitted October 13, 1981.
    John H. Corbett, Jr., for appellant;
    Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, JOHNSON and MONTEMURO, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence dated October 17, 1978 is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 200
    Commonwealth v. Mathis, Appellant.
    Submitted September 9,1981.
    Stephen H. Serota, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 201
    Commonwealth v. Mingo, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied July 21, 1982.
    Submitted May 22, 1981.
    John H. Corbett, Jr., for appellant;
    Robert L. Eberhardt, Deputy District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before HESTER, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 201
    Commonwealth v. Pope, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied July 1, 1982.
    Submitted February 18, 1981.
    William A. Fitzpatrick, for appellant;
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before JOHNSON, MONTEMURO and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   The judgment of sentence is affirmed on the comprehensive opinion of Judge James D. McCrudden.


text:
    445 A.2d 201
    Commonwealth v. Sigafoos, Appellant.

      Submitted February 23, 1982.
    Herbert V. Giobbi, for appellant;
    James J. Narlesky, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, McEWEN and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 202
    Commonwealth, Appellant v. Terfinko.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Granted Sept. 15,1982.
    Argued May 13, 1981.
    Henry S. Perkin, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellant;
    Lawrence B. Fox, for appellee.
    Before MONTEMURO, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

VAN der VOORT, J., concurred in the result.


text:
    445 A.2d 202
    Commonwealth v. Treadway, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied July 1, 1982.

      Argued April 6, 1981.
    Dean P. Arthur, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant;
    Michael S. Goodwin, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before SPAETH, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 202
    Commonwealth v. Williams, Appellant.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 10, 1982.
    Submitted October 5, 1981.
    Leonard Rubin, for appellant;
    Jane C. Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, McEWEN and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Judgment of sentence and order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 203
    Commonwealth ex rel. Shannon v. Shannon, Appellant.

      Argued February 23, 1982.
    Jay C. Glickman, for appellant;
    Richard J. Shiroff, submitted a brief on behalf of Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, McEWEN and HOFFMAN, JJ.
   Affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 203
    Com. ex rel. Wilson v. Greene, Appellant.
    Submitted January 25, 1982.
    Pamela Pryor Cohen, for appellant;
    Jane Cutler Greenspan, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before WIEAND, CIRILLO and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 203
    Crivellario, Appellant v. Stevens et ux.
    Submitted January 27, 1982.
    Gene F. Roscioli, for appellant;
    James C. Hogan, for appellees.
    Before WIEAND, CIRILLO and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order of the lower court is affirmed.


text:
    448 A.2d 644
    Estate of Grossman Appeal of Kesselman et al.
    Argued December 16,1981.
    Jacob S. Richman, for appellants;
    Samuel S. Blank, for appellee.
    Before WICKERSHAM, BECK and POPOVICH, JJ.
   The order of the Orphans’ Court Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, dated April 6, 1981 is affirmed and the order of the Orphans’ Court Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County entered May 24, 1977 is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 203
    Hockenberry v. Hockenberry, Appellant.
    Submitted April 1, 1981.
    W. David Marcello, for appellant;
    Anthony D. Miele, for appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., and HESTER and JOHNSON, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 204
    In re Randy Scott Frederici. Appeal of Randy Scott Frederici.
    Submitted September 11, 1980.
    Ellen L. Bernstein, for appellant;
    Peter Povanda, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, participating party.
    Before WICKERSHAM, HOFFMAN and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 204
    In re Gresham. Appeal of Concetta Verderame.
    Argued December 5, 1980.
    David S. Dessen, for appellant;
    Julius J. Jackson, III, submitted a brief on behalf of appellee.
    Before HESTER, CAVANAUGH and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Appeal quashed.


text:
    445 A.2d 204
    Kahn v. Philadelphia Telco Federal Credit Union, Appellant.
    Argued January 28, 1981.
    Edwin B. Barnett, for appellant;
    Harry C. Barbin, for appellee.
    Before CAVANAUGH, JOHNSON and LIPEZ, JJ.
   Judgment affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 204
    Mansmann Realty, Appellant v. Mellon Bank etc., et al.
    Argued May 20, 1981.
    Melaine Dipietro, for appellant;
    William E. Marquis, for Mellon, appellee;
    Thomas P. Lutz, for Benson, appellee.
    Before HESTER, POPOVICH and DiSALLE, JJ.
   Order affirmed.

DiSALLE, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.


text:
    445 A.2d 205
    Mazurek et al., Appellants v. Eva E. Maute et al.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 14, 1982.
    Argued September 30,1981.
    Thomas J. Dempsey, for appellants;
    John J. Kirk, for appellees.
    Before CAVANAUGH, MONTEMURO and VAN der VOORT, JJ.
   Affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 205
    Medley, Appellant v. Cumus Insurance Company.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied July 9, 1982.
    Argued January 26, 1982.
    Kenneth M. Rodgers, for appellant;
    Mary M. Rogers, for appellee.
    Before WIEAND, CIRILLO and POPOVICH, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 205
    Prestegiacomo et vir. v. Jones, Appellant.
    Argued May 21, 1981.
    Maury D. Nusbaum, for appellant;
    Daniel Berger, for appellees.
    Before HESTER, POPOVICH and MONTGOMERY, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 205
    Southeast Nat'l Bank v. Ostroff, Appellant.
    Argued March 31, 1981.
    Lester H. Novack, for appellant;
    Stephen H. Palmer, for appellee.
    Before CERCONE, P. J., HESTER and JOHNSON, JJ.
   Order affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 206
    Warminster General Hospital v. Wiggins et al. Appeal of Mabel B. Wiggins.

      Submitted January 20,1982.
    John J. Hart, for appellant;
    Kurt John Shaffer, for Warminster, appellee;
    Norman C. Henss, for Jamison Inn Inc. and Roth, appellees.
    Before JOHNSON, WATKINS and LIPEZ, JJ.
   The order of May 15, 1981 sustaining preliminary objections is affirmed.


text:
    445 A.2d 206
    Waterman et vir., Appellants v. Colonial Taxi Co., Inc.
    Argued October 15, 1981.
    Ronald L. Muha, for appellants;
    John C. Carlin, Jr., for appellee.
    Before WIEAND, JOHNSON and MONTEMURO, JJ.
   The judgment of February 23, 1981, is affirmed.


author: CERCONE, President Judge: WIEAND, Judge,

text:
    445 A.2d 117
    COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Nathan OWENS, Appellant.
    Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
    Submitted Dec. 5, 1980.
    Filed April 30, 1982.
    Petition for Allowance of Appeal Denied Sept. 9, 1982.

      Elias B. Landau, Philadelphia, for appellant.
    Gaele McLaughlin Barthold, Assistant District Attorney, Philadelphia, for Commonwealth, appellee.
    Before CERCONE, President Judge, and HESTER, and WIEAND, JJ.
   CERCONE, President Judge:

In this appeal, appellant, Nathan N. Owens, claims that a retrial would subject him to double jeopardy. He contends that a mistrial resulted due to overreaching on the part of the trial judge and alternatively, that there was no manifest necessity for the declaration of the mistrial. We find no merit to either of appellant’s arguments and thus, affirm the order of the trial court denying appellant’s pre-trial motion to dismiss.

Appellant was charged with simple and aggravated assault perpetrated upon a prison guard in an institution wherein appellant was an inmate. He was brought to trial before the Honorable Stanley L. Kubacki, J. and a jury. After both sides had rested, appellant announced in open court that he no longer required the services of his attorney. Following this announcement, the jury was removed from the court room, and the trial judge questioned appellant about his reasons for wanting the dismissal of counsel. Appellant stated that his counsel had declined to pose certain questions and call certain witnesses. Appellant requested that a new attorney be appointed to make the closing arguments. Upon denial of this request, appellant threatened that if he was not provided with new counsel, “I am going to disrupt the courtroom because I don’t want him to defend me no more.” Appellant carried through with his threat, was held in contempt of court, and given a sentence of six months imprisonment.

Eventually, the jury was returned to the courtroom for the completion of trial. Appellant, however, again disrupted the proceedings and dared the trial judge to hold him in contempt. Because appellant persisted in his uncontrolled behavior, Judge Kubacki found it necessary to hold appellant in contempt twice again. On each occasion when he did so, Judge Kubacki said, “I am sentencing you to an additional six months in jail for contempt to follow all sentences you are now serving.” The second time appellant retorted: “You can give me a thousand years.” At this point, defense counsel sought a mistrial, and the motion was granted by Judge Kubacki.

Appellant’s first argument contends that his trial was aborted due to judicial overreaching, and thus, retrial is barred. Specifically, appellant faults the trial judge (1) for holding appellant in contempt and sentencing him on the contempt charges in the presence of the jury thereby revealing to the jury that appellant was already serving time in prison; and (2) for failing to conduct a colloquy concerning appellant’s desire to represent himself. Generally, the double jeopardy clause does not bar retrial of a defendant who obtains a new trial upon his request for a mistrial. United States v. Dinitz, 424 U.S. 600, 96 S.Ct. 1075, 47 L.Ed.2d 267 (1976); Commonwealth v. Starks, 490 Pa. 336, 416 A.2d 498 (1980). However, reprosecution may be barred where the mistrial is attributable to governmental overreaching. United States v. Dinitz, supra; Commonwealth v. Starks, supra. The United States Supreme Court has articulated two types of overreaching: first, there is misconduct designed to provoke a mistrial in order to secure a second more favorable opportunity to convict defendant, and second, there is misconduct undertaken in bad faith which is designed to prejudice or harass the defendant. United States v. Dinitz, supra, 424 U.S. at 611, 96 S.Ct. at 1081; Commonwealth v. Starks, supra. The allegedly improper actions of the trial judge instantly did not constitute either type of overreaching. This is substantiated by the record.

Concerning appellant’s claim that it was misconduct to hold appellant in contempt and sentence him on that charge in the presence of the jury, we must note that the better practice would have been to conduct such proceedings outside the presence of the jury. Nevertheless, these actions by the judge, when viewed in light of the surrounding circumstances, do not suggest a bad faith effort to prejudice or an intent to provoke mistrial. As our earlier recitation of the events of the contempt procedure indicated, it was appellant’s unbridled, disruptive behavior in the presence of the jury which prompted the court to hold appellant in contempt and sentence him thereon. Appellant went so far as to even dare the trial judge to hold him in contempt. Indeed, the action by the trial judge could hardly have prejudiced appellant more than he had prejudiced himself in the eyes of the jury by his consistent, unruly conduct. Instantly, the court’s immediate decision to hold appellant in contempt was made during a very difficult situation and cannot in any way be considered conduct amounting to judicial overreaching.

Moreover, appellant cannot claim prejudice from being sentenced in the jury’s presence, and appellant’s contention that the trial judge committed misconduct by informing the jury that he had a criminal record is without support. The allegedly prejudicial statement, wherein the judge sentenced appellant “to an additional six months in jail for contempt to follow all sentences that you are now serving,” informed the jurors of no more than what they already knew from the trial testimony. The entire case concerned an assault by a prisoner, appellant, on a prison guard. Appellant did not deny attacking the guard, but disputed the circumstances and claimed self-defense. During trial, appellant was referred to by his counsel as a “prisoner”, which he in fact was. Appellant, himself, testified that he was living in Holmesburg Prison. In light of the foregoing, it becomes evident that there was no overreaching on the part of the trial judge.no suggestion of a bad faith effort to prejudice or intent to provoke a mistrial.

A claim of judicial overreaching also cannot be premised upon the claim that the trial judge failed to hold a colloquy of appellant concerning his desire to represent himself. The judge did conduct a colloquy, and “[t]he colloquy revealed appellant’s dissatisfaction with his counsel’s strategy during trial, particularly the failure to call several witnesses and to ask certain questions.” Commonwealth v. Owens, 496 Pa. 16, 19, 436 A.2d 129, 130 (1981). Moreover, when a request to dismiss counsel is made during the course of trial, as is the case herein, the request is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Commonwealth v. Owens, 496 Pa. at 24 n.6, 436 A.2d at 133 n.6. We can find no abuse of that discretion.

Given all the circumstances of this case, we find no judicial overreaching and reprosecution of appellant is not barred.

As an alternate argument, appellant asserts that because the element of manifest necessity was not present, the trial judge erred in granting defense counsel’s motion for mistrial. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court, following the precedent set by the United States Supreme Court, has held that “[djouble jeopardy attaches if a mistrial is declared without ‘manifest necessity’ or without the defendant’s request or consent, (citations omitted).” Commonwealth v. Wideman, 453 Pa. 119, 122, 306 A.2d 894, 895 (1973). The thrust of appellant’s argument herein is that he did not consent to his counsel’s motion for mistrial, and consequently, manifest necessity did not exist. The record, however, discloses that appellant did effectively consent to a mistrial. Although appellant did not personally request the mistrial, he made no objection when his counsel did so. When this same factual scenario occurred in Commonwealth v. Manley, 252 Pa.Superior Ct. 77, 380 A.2d 1290 (1977), our Court found consent. Moreover, appellant immediately thanked the judge for granting his counsel’s motion for mistrial. On these facts counsel’s request was binding on appellant.

Finally, the record discloses the existence of manifest necessity, further disproving this last claim raised by appellant. Justice Story, authoring the opinion in United States v. Perez, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 579, 6 L.Ed. 165 (1824), described the concept of manifest necessity as follows:

The law has invested Courts of Justice with the authority to discharge a jury from giving any verdict, whenever, in their opinion, taking all the circumstances into consideration, there is manifest necessity for the act, or the ends of justice would otherwise be defeated. They are to exercise a sound discretion on the subject; and it is impossible to define all the circumstances which would render it proper to interfere. To be sure, the power ought to be used with the greatest caution, under urgent circumstances, and for very plain and obvious causes....

Herein, the grant of a mistrial was manifestly necessary to prevent the ends of justice from being defeated. Appellant disrupted the trial proceedings out of the presence of the jury, continued his unruly behaviour upon the jury’s return, and indicated that he would not cease. There can be no more manifest necessity for stopping a trial than the inability of the court to continue in an orderly fashion, or the inability of the finder of fact to reach an impartial verdict because appellant, by flagrant misbehavior, has almost certainly prejudiced the finder of fact against him.

Order of lower court affirmed.

WIEAND, J., files a concurring opinion.

WIEAND, Judge,

concurring:

I agree fully with the majority that a second trial for Nathan Owens is not barred by considerations of double jeopardy. I write only to emphasize that while the trial judge did not abuse his discretion by declaring a mistrial in this case, a trial court is not required to declare a mistrial in all instances in which a disruptive defendant, by his own flagrant misbehavior, makes it difficult to proceed in an orderly fashion or appears to prejudice the jury against him. If “manifest necessity” for declaring a mistrial existed in every case where a defendant engaged in disruptive and contemptuous behavior, “.. . it would provide an easy device for defendants to provoke mistrials whenever they might choose to do so.” United States v. Bentvena, 319 F.2d 916, 931 (2nd Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 375 U.S. 940, 84 S.Ct. 345, 11 L.Ed.2d 271 (1963), reh. denied, 397 U.S. 928, 90 S.Ct. 894, 25 L.Ed.2d 108 (1970), quoting United States v. Aviles, 274 F.2d 179, 193 (2nd Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 974, 80 S.Ct. 1057, 4 L.Ed.2d 1009 (1960). See generally: Anno., Disruptive Conduct of Accused in Presence of Jury as Ground for Mistrial or Discharge of Jury, 89 A.L.R.3d 960.

I do not believe it should be “the function of an appellate court with all the advantages of hindsight to substitute itself for the trial judge and to declare how it might have handled each situation or to deliver lengthy admonitions to trial judges on the proprieties of conducting these difficult criminal trials. . . . ” United States v. Bentvena, supra at 933. Nevertheless, it may not be amiss to suggest that an alternative preferable to declaring a mistrial can be found in the ABA Standards Relating to the Function of the Trial Judge, § 6.8, where the following appears:

A defendant may be removed from the courtroom during his trial when his conduct is so disruptive that the trial cannot proceed in an orderly manner. Removal is preferable to gagging or shackling the disruptive defendant. If removed, the defendant should be required to be in the court building while the trial is in progress, to be given the opportunity of learning of the trial proceedings through his counsel at reasonable intervals, and be given a continuing opportunity to return to the courtroom during the trial upon his assurance of good behavior. The removed defendant should be summoned to the courtroom at appropriate intervals, with the offer to permit him to remain repeated in open court each time.

See also Commonwealth v. Africa, 466 Pa. 603, 353 A.2d 855 (1976).

Because I do not understand the majority opinion to require a mistrial in cases of disruptive defendants but, rather, to leave the dealing with such defendants to the sound discretion of the trial judge, I join therein.

      . In connection with this claim, appellant also questions the legality of the court’s summary procedure. Appellant’s direct appeal in our Supreme Court disposed of this issue, and the matter is finally litigated. The Supreme Court did not find the trial court’s procedure infirm. See Commonwealth v. Owens, 496 Pa. 16, 436 A.2d 129 (1981).

      . The standard for determining what constitutes governmental overreaching is whether the mistrial has been deliberately provoked or whether the government has acted in bad faith. Commonwealth v. Virtu, 495 Pa. 59, 432 A.2d 198 (1981), Commonwealth v. Hoskins, 494 Pa. 600, 432 A.2d 149 (1981); Commonwealth v. Starks, supra, Commonwealth v. Custor, 296 Pa.Super. 235, 442 A.2d 746. See also The Double Jeopardy Clause and Mistrials Granted on Defendant’s Motion: What Kind of Prosecutorial Misconduct Precludes Reprosecution?, 18 Duq.L.Rev. 103 (1979).