Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
30 Pennsylvania opinions name it 4 courts 1976–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Delbridgegreen2 sentences2025Id. at 40 . -6- J-S08022-25 The Court in Delbridge set the parameters for trial courts to follow for a taint hearing. 2025In a taint hearing, it is within the trial court’s discretion to decide whether, based on the facts of a case, “expert testimony would assist the court in understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue.” Id. at 43 (citing Pa.R.E. 702). | 4 | 9 |
Commonwealth v. Mooregreen2 sentences2026In Commonwealth v. Moore, 980 A.2d 647 (Pa.Super. 2009), this Court reiterated that the critical age for purposes of conducting a taint hearing is not the age at the time of the crime but the age at the time of trial. 2019In Commonwealth v. Moore, 980 A.2d 647 (Pa.Super.2009), this Court reiterated that the critical age for purposes of conducting a taint hearing is not the age at the time of the crime but the age at the time of trial. | 4 | 6 |
United States v. Wadegreen2 sentences2019See Wade , 388 U.S. at 241 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 ; Gilbert , 388 U.S. at 272-73 , 87 S.Ct. 1951 . 2019See Wade , 388 U.S. at 241 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 ; Gilbert , 388 U.S. at 272-73 , 87 S.Ct. 1951 . | 2 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Juddgreen2 sentences2017During the hearing the party alleging taint bears the burden of production of evidence of taint and the burden of persuasion to show taint by clear and convincing evidence.” Id. at 40 . “[T]he resolution of a taint challenge to the competency of a child witness is a matter addressed to the discretion of the trial court.” Id. at 41 . 28 “When determining whether a defendant has presented ‘some evidence’ of taint, the court must consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding the child’s allegations.” Judd, 897 A.2d at 1229 . 2016See Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 707 (Pa. Super. 2011) (stating that because witnesses were “fourteen and fifteen at the time of the taint hearing -7- J-S06026-16 … the issue of taint was totally irrelevant as a matter of law[]”); accord Commonwealth v. Judd, 897 A.2d 1224, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 912 A.2d 1291 (Pa. 2006). | 1 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Penagreen2 sentences2016See Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 707 (Pa. Super. 2011) (stating that because witnesses were “fourteen and fifteen at the time of the taint hearing -7- J-S06026-16 … the issue of taint was totally irrelevant as a matter of law[]”); accord Commonwealth v. Judd, 897 A.2d 1224, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 912 A.2d 1291 (Pa. 2006). 2016See Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 707 (Pa. Super. 2011) (stating that because witnesses were “fourteen and fifteen at the time of the taint hearing -7- J-S06026-16 … the issue of taint was totally irrelevant as a matter of law[]”); accord Commonwealth v. Judd, 897 A.2d 1224, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 912 A.2d 1291 (Pa. 2006). | 1 | 2 |
Commonwealth v. Smithgreen1 sentence2020Commonwealth v. Smith, 167 A.3d 782, 790 (Pa. Super. 2017). -7- J-S71029-19 Here, the trial court explained its decision to deny Appellant’s request for a taint hearing as follows: In this case, applying the Delbridge factors, this [c]ourt denied the defense request for a taint hearing because the defense offer of proof was insufficient and did not meet the threshold that would entitle him to a taint hearing. [N.T., 6/25/18, at 17]. | 1 | 1 |
Com. v. Juddgreen2 sentences2016See Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 707 (Pa. Super. 2011) (stating that because witnesses were “fourteen and fifteen at the time of the taint hearing -7- J-S06026-16 … the issue of taint was totally irrelevant as a matter of law[]”); accord Commonwealth v. Judd, 897 A.2d 1224, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 912 A.2d 1291 (Pa. 2006). 2016See Commonwealth v. Pena, 31 A.3d 704, 707 (Pa. Super. 2011) (stating that because witnesses were “fourteen and fifteen at the time of the taint hearing -7- J-S06026-16 … the issue of taint was totally irrelevant as a matter of law[]”); accord Commonwealth v. Judd, 897 A.2d 1224, 1229 (Pa. Super. 2006), appeal denied, 912 A.2d 1291 (Pa. 2006). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Poust v. Hyltongreen1 sentence2018But see Poust v. Hylton, 940 A.2d 380, 387 (Pa. Super. 2007) (holding that where counsel used the word “cocaine” in questioning a witness after the mention of cocaine had been precluded in a ruling on a motion in limine, a mistrial was warranted - 12 - J-A11018-18 and “it [was] abundantly clear that no curative instruction could have obliterated the taint of defense counsel’s use of the word”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gilbert v. California
green
2 sentences2019See Wade, 388 U.S. at 241 ; Gilbert, 388 U.S. at 272-73 . 2019See Wade , 388 U.S. at 241 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 ; Gilbert , 388 U.S. at 272-73 , 87 S.Ct. 1951 . | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Alleyne v. United States
green
1 sentence2026Anzalone filed a pro se response to the Rule 907 notice alleging that PCRA counsel failed to raise trial counsel’s ineffectiveness for: (1) failure to request a taint hearing to test the validity of the minor victims’ testimony and (2) failure to raise a challenge to the imposition of mandatory minimum sentences pursuant to Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (2013). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Commonwealth v. Finley
green
2 sentences2025On December 3, 2020, the trial court reinstated Appellant’s right to file a petition for allowance of appeal nunc pro tunc and Appellant subsequently filed the petition on December 29, 2020. 3 Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491 , 544 A.2d 927 (1988); Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa.Super. 1988) (en banc). -5- J-S07041-25 Appellant raises the following issue for our review: Trial counsel was ineffective due to failure to bring in a taint analysis of the forensic interview by failing to request a taint hearing. 2025On December 3, 2020, the trial court reinstated Appellant’s right to file a petition for allowance of appeal nunc pro tunc and Appellant subsequently filed the petition on December 29, 2020. 3 Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491 , 544 A.2d 927 (1988); Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa.Super. 1988) (en banc). -5- J-S07041-25 Appellant raises the following issue for our review: Trial counsel was ineffective due to failure to bring in a taint analysis of the forensic interview by failing to request a taint hearing. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Commonwealth v. Turner
green
2 sentences2025On December 3, 2020, the trial court reinstated Appellant’s right to file a petition for allowance of appeal nunc pro tunc and Appellant subsequently filed the petition on December 29, 2020. 3 Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491 , 544 A.2d 927 (1988); Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa.Super. 1988) (en banc). -5- J-S07041-25 Appellant raises the following issue for our review: Trial counsel was ineffective due to failure to bring in a taint analysis of the forensic interview by failing to request a taint hearing. 2025On December 3, 2020, the trial court reinstated Appellant’s right to file a petition for allowance of appeal nunc pro tunc and Appellant subsequently filed the petition on December 29, 2020. 3 Commonwealth v. Turner, 518 Pa. 491 , 544 A.2d 927 (1988); Commonwealth v. Finley, 550 A.2d 213 (Pa.Super. 1988) (en banc). -5- J-S07041-25 Appellant raises the following issue for our review: Trial counsel was ineffective due to failure to bring in a taint analysis of the forensic interview by failing to request a taint hearing. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Commonwealth v. Spotz
green
1 sentence2024He contends that the taint hearing was necessary because his defense was that his wife and mother-in- law “turned his children against him” due to his former homosexuality and problems with substance abuse, but that “[n]one of these influences were examined by trial counsel.” Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Commonwealth v. Davis
green
1 sentence2023Id. at 910 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Com. v. Saez, R.
green
1 sentence2021Id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Commonwealth v. Mazzoccoli
green
1 sentence2019Johns claims that such a hearing was appropriate because the police interviewed K.A.P. without his parents present and the same police officer who interviewed K.A.P. also drove him to court on the day ____________________________________________ 7 Johns’ reliance on Commonwealth v. Mazzaccoli, 380 A.2d 786 (Pa. 1977), is inapposite. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Cannon
green
1 sentence2018Here, while we agree with Appellant that a motion in limine is designed to prevent prejudicial information from reaching the jury, we agree with the trial court that Appellant’s statement that the legal aspects of his termination from Geisinger were “muddled” opened the door to permit the jury to hear the outcome of the Geisinger litigation.5 See Cannon, 563 A.2d at 922-23 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Commonwealth v. Cesar
green
1 sentence2007The appellant in that case argued that the witness had been “improperly coached by her mother, the assistant District Attorney, and the victim/witness coordinator.” Cesar, supra at 985 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Commonwealth v. Hill
green
2 sentences2005See Pa.R.Crim.P. 600(C)(3), which excludes from the commencement period: “such period of delay at any stage of the proceedings as results from: (a) the unavailability of the defendant or the defendant’s attorney; (b) any continuance granted at the request of the defendant or the defendant’s attorney.” See also, Commonwealth v. Hill, 558 Pa. 238 , 736 A.2d 578 (1999) (Time between filing and resolution of defendant’s pretrial motions is excludable from the speedy trial period if the motion delayed trial and thus made the defendant unavailable). 2005See Pa.R.Crim.P. 600(C)(3), which excludes from the commencement period: “such period of delay at any stage of the proceedings as results from: (a) the unavailability of the defendant or the defendant’s attorney; (b) any continuance granted at the request of the defendant or the defendant’s attorney.” See also, Commonwealth v. Hill, 558 Pa. 238 , 736 A.2d 578 (1999) (Time between filing and resolution of defendant’s pretrial motions is excludable from the speedy trial period if the motion delayed trial and thus made the defendant unavailable). | 1 | 2005–2005 |
English v. State
green
2 sentences2003Id. 2003Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Delaware v. Prouse
green
1 sentence1985In Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979), the Supreme Court of the United States said that what •makes unconstitutional the stopping of a vehicle for a license check is the unconstrained exercise of discretion by a police officer in stopping the vehicle. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Middleberg v. Middleberg
green
2 sentences1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). 1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Commonwealth v. Ray
green
2 sentences1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). 1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Commonwealth v. Guardiani
green
2 sentences1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). 1977Commonwealth v. Ray, 448 Pa. 307 , 292 A.2d 410 (1972); Middleberg v. Middleberg, 427 Pa. 114 , 233 A.2d 889 (1967); Commonwealth v. Guardiani, 226 Pa.Super. 435 , 310 A.2d 422 (1973). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Commonwealth v. Garvin
green
2 sentences1976Wong Sun, supra; Commonwealth v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 293 A.2d 33 (1972); 4 see also, Belsky, Criminal Procedure in Pennsylvania: The Pretrial Issues in Four Parts, Part III, 78 Dick.L.Rev. 209, 262 (1973). 1976Wong Sun, supra; Commonwealth v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 293 A.2d 33 (1972); 4 see also, Belsky, Criminal Procedure in Pennsylvania: The Pretrial Issues in Four Parts, Part III, 78 Dick.L.Rev. 209, 262 (1973). | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.