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.
14 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2025 2 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. Elmobdygreen1 sentence2025The suppression court is free to believe all, some or none of the evidence presented at the suppression hearing.” Commonwealth v. Elmobdy, 823 A.2d 180, 183 (Pa. Super. 2003) (internal citation omitted). *** Appellant claims that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress because the evidence at the suppression hearing indicates that Officer Brennan lacked reasonable suspicion that Appellant was under the age of 21 and, thus, illegally possessed the firearm. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Rushgreen1 sentence2021See Rush, supra. Further, the evidence at the suppression hearing established the following: Officer Gansky was assigned to the Special Investigation Unit, and he had training in investigating narcotics or controlled substance cases. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Fogliagreen1 sentence2019To be sure, the evidence at the suppression hearing establishes that: Officer Fischbach was an experienced, five-year veteran of the Philadelphia Police - 10 - Department;6 the vehicle stop occurred in a high-crime area;7 at the time of the stop, “[t]he sun was setting [and] . . . it was starting to get dark;”8 Appellant’s vehicle had a darkly-tinted windshield and darkly-tinted windows;9 when Officer Fischbach approached Appellant’s vehicle, he “could see ____________________________________________ 6 See Cartagena, (holding that the officer’s “training and experience and its role in formulat | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Millnergreen1 sentence2016Compare, id. (declining to remand for compliance (Footnote Continued Next Page) -2- J-S06022-16 The evidence at the suppression hearing established the following facts. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Luvgreen2 sentences2005See Luv, 557 Pa. at 576 , 735 A.2d at 90 . ¶ 12 The evidence at the suppression hearing showed that appellant was selling videotapes packaged in low-quality cardboard with blurry printing. 2005See Luv, 557 Pa. at 576 , 735 A.2d at 90 . ¶ 12 The evidence at the suppression hearing showed that appellant was selling videotapes packaged in low-quality cardboard with blurry printing. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Morrisgreen2 sentences2002See also Commonwealth v. Morris, 422 Pa.Super. 343 , 619 A.2d 709, 711 (1992). 2002See also Commonwealth v. Morris, 422 Pa.Super. 343 , 619 A.2d 709, 711 (1992). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Stricklergreen2 sentences2002We conclude that the trial court erred both in assessing the evidence at the suppression hearing and in failing to follow controlling appellate decisions that prescribe the point at which a seizure commences and the level of suspicion necessary to meet Constitutional muster. ¶ 8 The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution protect citizens from “unreasonable searches and seizures, including those entailing only a brief detention.” Commonwealth v. Strickler, 563 Pa. 47 , 757 A.2d 884, 888 (2000). 2002We conclude that the trial court erred both in assessing the evidence at the suppression hearing and in failing to follow controlling appellate decisions that prescribe the point at which a seizure commences and the level of suspicion necessary to meet Constitutional muster. ¶ 8 The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution protect citizens from “unreasonable searches and seizures, including those entailing only a brief detention.” Commonwealth v. Strickler, 563 Pa. 47 , 757 A.2d 884, 888 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Steagald v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1993See: Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 208-211 , 101 S.Ct. 1642, 1646-1647 , 68 L.Ed.2d 38, 43-45 (1981) (holding that Government could not raise for first time on certiorari to Supreme Court issue of whether defendant possessed a legitimate expectation of privacy in a house which had been searched by police). 1993See: Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204, 208-211 , 101 S.Ct. 1642, 1646-1647 , 68 L.Ed.2d 38, 43-45 (1981) (holding that Government could not raise for first time on certiorari to Supreme Court issue of whether defendant possessed a legitimate expectation of privacy in a house which had been searched by police). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In the Interest of L.J.
green
2 sentences2020Appellant asserts these facts did not “establish reasonable suspicion that drug activity was afoot.” Id. 2020Appellant asserts these facts did not “establish reasonable suspicion that drug activity was afoot.” Id. | 3 | 2020–2020 |
Commonwealth v. Logan
green
2 sentences2019Here, the circumstances of Knox’s confession, as demonstrated by the evidence at the suppression hearing, show that it was “the product of a free, unconstrained, and rational choice of [Knox].” See id. at 537 . 2019Here, the circumstances of Knox’s confession, as demonstrated by the evidence at the suppression hearing, show that it was “the product of a free, unconstrained, and rational choice of [Knox].” See id. at 537 . | 2 | 2019–2019 |
Commonwealth v. Busch
green
2 sentences1999Thus, Busch, supra, is distinguishable from the case sub judice. 1999Thus, Busch, supra, is distinguishable from the case sub judice. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
United States v. Wade
green
2 sentences1984United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967), Commonwealth v. Whiting, supra. As to witnesses Tone, Cauterucci and Murphy, the evidence at the suppression hearing clearly establishes the existence of an independent basis for in-court identification. 1984United States v. Wade, 388 U.S. 218 , 87 S.Ct. 1926 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1149 (1967), Commonwealth v. Whiting, supra. As to witnesses Tone, Cauterucci and Murphy, the evidence at the suppression hearing clearly establishes the existence of an independent basis for in-court identification. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.