*1 599 where the building only people present interrogators. and his Despite fact that numerous rela- tives attempted to contact appellant, the police refused any such contact until after appellant had confessed. Finally, was not arraigned until approximately sixteen hours after his arrest.
A combination of all of these factors, based on either the
Commonwealth’s evidence or the uncontradicted evidence
presented by appellant, compels the conclusion that appel-
lant’s confession was obtained by the use of impermissible
coercion.
psychological
such,
As
appellant’s statement was
and should
involuntary
have been suppressed. See Culombe
Connecticut,
367
U.S.
L.Ed.2d 1265(1959); Eiland, Commonwealth v. supra.
Judgment of sentence reversed and a new trial granted. KAUFFMAN and WILKINSON, JJ., did not participate in the decision of this case.
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA GOULD, Appellant. William E.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Argued Jan.
Decided March *2 Aaron, for Philadelphia, appellant. Kenneth E. Saull, Sol., Ellis Asst. Weintraub, Dep. M. City M. Stewart Sol., appellee. City ROBERTS, O’BRIEN, NIX, LARSEN, and Before C. HUTCHINSON, JJ. FLAHERTY, McDERMOTT OF THE COURT OPINION FLAHERTY, Justice. of the from a final Order
This 1,1979, Pa.Cmwlth. Court entered E. of William Gould holding on its that based tactic and Gould) in that was (hereinafter (herein- City Philadelphia counsel fees to awarding City), appellee. sole issue in case whether in awarding error fees to the City. litigation began
This in the Court Common Pleas of Term, 1975, at March when the Phila- complaint filed a delphia assumpsit of New Jersey, obligated alleging Gould pay wage tax to the because of his employment by Department Navy, Support Activities, Naval at the United States Naval on League Base Island. The City served Gould Arm Long Stat- ute then in at 42 effect et seq., challenged court’s
statute. The challenge was made by way April 23, filed on
While these pending, another case involving the same issues of in (New and the same Jersey working facts at League refusing Island and the pay Philadelphia wage tax) was proceeding the In through system. court case, City Bullion, of v. John E. 28 Pa. Comwlth.Ct. the (1977), court held that there was in proper personam jurisdiction. On 1977, this Court appeal denied allowance of in Bullion. On 3, 1977, August appealed Bullion was to The United States Supreme Court. 2, 1977, August
On
our
following
denial of
of
allowance
Bullion,
in
the
appeal
trial court dismissed
prelimi-
Gould’s
nary objections.
August
On
1977 Gould appealed to the
Commonwealth Court.
two months
Roughly
after Gould’s
the
appeal
Court,
31, 1977,
on October
Supreme
United States
Court
appeal
dismissed the
filed
in Bullion v. of
434
This dismissal Gould’s The case Court docket. on the Commonwealth mained months after the roughly of fifteen argued dismissed the Bul Supreme appeal United States 1, 1979, lion, on June Order the trial court’s affirming entered an argument,
oral the objections. Additionally, of the preliminary dismissal it considered counsel fees court awarded The court observed the dilatory.2 tactics to be Gould’s Bullion, identical those Gould’s case were with facts of arm statute long of service legality and that Further, the court felt of there. disposed was raised significant developments there bear that since had been law application to the issues raised in ing Bullion, same as the issues raised by which were the decided, recently Bullion had been Gould’s appeal and since disagree. a tactic. We Constitution be a appeal There shall of in all cases to court of right record; from a not of and there shall also be record from a court of record or from an right appeal to a court of record or to an agency appel- administrative provided the selection of such court to be as late law; other as and there shall be such rights may by law. provided be Art. 5 meaning 9. Under plain
Pa.Const. from the had adverse provision, abrogated in his case. This not be ruling may below *4 another, case by similar has been decided an simply 662, Jordan, (1974). fees was made to 42 2. The award 2503(7), which § following participants shall be reasonable entitled to a coun- part of fee as the taxable costs the matter: sel Any (7) participant as a who awarded counsel fees sanction dilatory, participant or another obdurate vexatious during pendency of matter. conduct where particularly this Court had never decided issue on its merits. In this case took an based on arguments that had rejected been by but never finally adjudicated by Furthermore, Court. the prior adjudication the Common- wealth Court had been more than two years prior argument this case. Under circumstances, these there is per se abuse in arguing appeal grounded the same as advanced in arguments the prior appeal.
Order of the Commonwealth Court reversed.
McDERMOTT, joins the majority opinion and files a concurring opinion.
McDERMOTT,Justice, concurring.
I concur with the majority. The not denied his He was appeal. sanctioned under the salutary of 42 provisions Pa.C.S.A. 2503(7) because the Common- wealth Court found his action dilatory. To mind he my because, saved as Mr. only out, Justice Flaherty points his arguments rejected by the Commonwealth Court were never fully adjudicated by Court. The right to appeal is constitutionally preserved. duty sanction the mani- fest abuse of that must also be preserved. FEIERTAG, Feiertag,
Elizabeth Widow of Edwin J.
Deceased, Appellant, MODERN TRANSFER.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Argued Jan. 1982.
Decided Feb.
Reargument Denied