Commonwealth v. Muhammad, R., Aplt.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania affirmed Muhammad’s conviction for carrying a firearm without a license, holding that the jury’s negative answer to a special interrogatory does not create an evidentiary insufficiency and that §6106 does not require proof of both possession and control. The Court also affirmed that the doctrine of inconsistent verdicts does not apply where the interrogatory’s question does not mirror the statutory elements. Accordingly, the order of the Superior Court upholding the judgment of sentence was affirmed.