18 Pa.C.S. § 2301 defines a deadly weapon as "Any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or serious bodily injury, or any other device or instrumentality which, in the manner in which it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or serious bodily injury". Note that this includes whether the weapon is loaded or unloaded. It can even be applied if you never carried the weapon but knew that it was being carried by a co-defendant/conspirator.
42 Pa.C.S. § 9712 states, "Except as provided under section 9716 (relating to two or more mandatory minimum sentences applicable), any person who is convicted in any court of this Commonwealth of a crime of violence as defined in section 9714(g) (relating to sentences for second and subsequent offenses), shall, if the person visibly possessed a firearm or a replica of a firearm, whether or not the firearm or replica was loaded or functional, that placed the victim in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury, during the commission of the offense, be sentenced to a minimum sentence of at least five years of total confinement notwithstanding any other provision of this title or other statute to the contrary. Such persons shall not be eligible for parole, probation, work release or furlough."
So, if you are facing a crime in
Lehigh County and it is alleged that a gun was used, you better talk to your
Lehigh County criminal lawyer about the potential for a mandatory enhancement of 5 years. Sometimes, your attorney can get this mandatory withdrawn for a negotiated guilty plea.
One case to look at is
Commonwealth v. Matos, 382 Pa. Super. 401 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1989). In this case, the defendant and three other men robbed a store owner at gunpoint. Although appellant never possessed a firearm during the robbery, he had knowledge that the firearm was visibly possessed by his accomplice during its commission. Appellant was found guilty and sentenced according to the Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Act (Act), Pa. Stat. Ann. tit. 42, § 9712. Appellant claimed the mandatory sentencing provisions of the Act were inapplicable to unarmed accomplices. Appellant contended that a previous decision holding that the provisions did apply to unarmed accomplices was wrongly decided. The court stated it was not in a position to overrule the earlier decision and followed the rule that an unarmed accomplice to a crime mandating imposition of sentence under the Act should be sentenced according to the Act's provisions if there was proof that he had knowledge that the firearm was visibly possessed by his co-felon in the commission of the crime. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of sentence.