Com. v. Hetrick, J. ( 2014 )

J.S15041/14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
Appellant :
:
v. :
:
JEREMY MATTHEW HETRICK, :
: No. 1202 MDA 2013
Appellee :
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence January 30, 2013
In the Court of Common Pleas of Lebanon County
Criminal Division No(s).: CP-38-CR-0000855-2012
BEFORE: BOWES, OLSON, and FITZGERALD,* JJ.
DISSENTING STATEMENT BY FITZGERALD, J.:FILED SEPTEMBER 24, 2014
I respectfully dissent, as I would vacate the sentence and remand for
re-sentencing. I would find the record did not evince due consideration of
the gravity of the offense and its impact on the life of the victim, and the
impact on the community.
I acknowledge that the court may deviate from the sentencing
guidelines,
if necessary, to fashion a sentence that takes into account
. . . the gravity of the particular offense as it relates
to the impact on the life of the victim and the
community, so long as the court also states of record the
factual basis and specific reasons which compelled the
deviation from the guidelines.
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J. S15041/14
Commonwealth v. Kenner, 784 A.2d 808, 811 (Pa. Super. 2001)
(emphasis added); see also 42 Pa.C.S. § 9721(b). The court, when
deviating from the guideline adequate reasons for the
Commonwealth v. Antidormi, 84 A.3d 736,
760 (Pa. Super. 2014), (emphasis added), appeal denied, ___ A.3d ___, 126
dispassionate
d Commonwealth v.
Rodda, 723 A.2d 212, 216 (Pa. Super. 1999) (en banc) (emphasis in
original).
Although the trial court gave a lengthy statement of its reasons for the
sentence and referenced the presentence report, I would find the record did
not evince due consideration of the gravity of the offense and its impact on
the life of the victim and the community. Therefore, I would vacate the
judgment of sentence and remand for re-sentencing. See Antidormi, 84
A.3d at 760; Kenner, 784 A.2d at 811.
-2-