J-A25001-14
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
: PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee :
:
v. :
:
NICOLETA COMOARA, :
:
Appellant : No. 513 EDA 2014
Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence January 17, 2014,
Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County,
Criminal Division at No. CP-51-SA-0005298-2013
BEFORE: DONOHUE, WECHT and PLATT*, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY DONOHUE, J.: FILED SEPTEMBER 26, 2014
entered following her conviction of meeting or overtaking a school bus, 75
Pa.C.S.A. § 3345. We affirm.
On September 23, 2014, Officer Ned Felici issued Comoara a citation
for violating § 3345 of the Vehicle Code after he observed her drive around a
school bus that had its lights flashing and side arm extended while children
were alighting. Comoara contested the citation and filed a notice of
summary appeal. The matter was heard before the trial court on January
17, 2013, at the conclusion of which the trial court found Comoara guilty.
Comoara filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court ordered Comoara to
file Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) a statement of matters complained of on appeal, and
Comoara complied.
*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J-A25001-14
Comoara raises the following issue for our review:
conviction for either meeting or overtaking a school
bus since the evidence did not establish that
[Comoara] met or overtook a school bus while the
red signal lights on the school bus were flashing and
the side stop signal arm activated[?]
In support of her claim, Comoara argues only that the trial court erred
Brief at 6-
Commonwealth v. Gibbs,
981 A.2d 274, 282 (Pa. Super. 2009). As Comoara did not include a
challenge to the weight of the evidence as to her convictions in her Pa.R.A.P.
1925(b) statement of matters complained of on appeal, she has failed to
preserve this argument for purposes of appeal. Commonwealth v. Rolan,
1925(b)(4)(vii). Furthermore, th
evidence presented at trial in an oral or written motion prior to sentencing or
in a post-
Commonwealth v. Bryant, 57 A.3d 191, 196 (Pa. Super. 2012). The
-2-
J-A25001-14
record reveals that Comoara did not challenge the weight of the evidence at
any time before the trial court; accordingly, even if she had included a
challenge to the weight of the evidence in her Rule 1925(b) statement, we
would still find this issue waived.
Judgment of sentence affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 9/26/2014
-3-