Com. v. Brown, K. (memorandum)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
J. S03004/16 NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION – SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA v. KEVIN DOUGLAS BROWN, Appellant : : : : : : : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA No. 527 EDA 2015 Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence, February 6, 2015, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No. CP-51-CR-0009758-2013 BEFORE: FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., OTT AND JENKINS, JJ. MEMORANDUM BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED MARCH 03, 2016 Kevin Douglas Brown appeals from the judgment of sentence of February 6, 2015. We affirm. The trial court convicted appellant of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, criminal conspiracy, and a violation of the Uniform Firearms Act1 on July 23, 2014. On February 6, 2015, the trial court sentenced appellant to an aggregate term of five to ten years’ imprisonment. Appellant filed post-sentence motions, which the trial court denied on February 18, 2015. This timely appeal followed. Appellant raises the following issues for our review: 1. 1 Was the evidence insufficient as a matter of law such that no reasonable factfinder could 35 P.S. § 780-113(a)(30); 18 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 903(c) and 6105(a)(1), respectively. J. S03004/16 have found Mr. Brown guilty of Possession with Intent to Deliver beyond a reasonable doubt where there was no evidence of record that Kevin Brown was involved in any narcotics transaction nor were any narcotics recovered from him[?] 2. Was the evidence insufficient as a matter of law such that no reasonable factfinder could have found Mr. Brown guilty of Possession of a Firearm beyond a reasonable doubt when the only evidence presented on the record was that Kevin Brown went into a room of a house where a firearm was ultimately recovered[?] 3. Was the verdict of guilty against the weight of the evidence because there was uncontradicted testimony from defense witness Dawn Stinger that Kevin Brown did not live in the front room of the residence where the firearm and drug paraphernalia were found[?] Appellant’s brief at 9. Having determined, after careful review, that the Honorable Daniel J. Anders, in his Rule 1925(a) opinion of June 17, 2015, ably and comprehensively disposes of appellant’s issues on appeal, with appropriate reference to the record and without legal error, we will affirm on the basis of that opinion. Judgment of sentence affirmed. -2- J. S03004/16 Judgment Entered. Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq. Prothonotary Date: 3/3/2016 -3-
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.
