Com. v. Graves (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J-S03002-13 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee v. MALCOLM GRAVES, Appellant No. 1481 WDA 2011 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence entered August 15, 2011, in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Criminal Division, at No(s): CP-02-CR-0008102-2010 BEFORE: BENDER, ALLEN, and MUSMANNO, JJ. MEMORANDUM BY BENDER, J.: Filed: February 26, 2013 Malcolm Graves appeals the judgment of sentence of two years probation imposed following his conviction of Firearms Not To Be Carried Without a License, Possession of a Controlled Substance, and Possession With Intent to Deliver. See 18 Pa.C.S. § 6106(a)(1); 35 P.S. § 780- 113(a)(16), (30) (respectively). Graves asserts that the trial court erred in denying his omnibus pre-trial motion seeking suppression of the evidence seized from his person during a patdown when police officers arrested his companion, Brian White, after White had conducted an armed robbery. The victim of the robbery had called police, identified White by name, and picked him out of a photo array, following which the officers located him in Graves company as the two men walked down the street. J-S03002-13 Following Graves arrest on the foregoing charges, and a hearing on his suppression motion, respective counsel stipulated the facts of the case and the trial court found Graves guilty of the foregoing charges. In ruling on the suppression motion, the trial court, The Honorable Randal B. Todd, concluded that the totality of the circumstances known to the arresting officers when they conducted Graves patdown did provide reasonable suspicion that he might be armed and dangerous. Judge Todd concluded accordingly that the police had conducted a lawful search and seizure pursuant to our holding in In the Interest of N.L., 739 A.2d 564 (Pa. Super. 1999). Upon review of Judge Todd s Pa.R.A.P. 1925(a) Opinion, the briefs of counsel, and the certified record, we find the trial court s determinations free from error. Judge Todd s Opinion addresses the issue before us in a cogent and comprehensive manner. Accordingly, we adopt that Opinion as our own and rest on its conclusions for purposes of further appellate review. For the reasons stated therein, we affirm Graves judgment of sentence. Judgment of sentence AFFIRMED. -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
