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.
12 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1981–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Com. v. Muhammad, R.green1 sentence2025Commonwealth v. Muhammad, 289 A.3d 1078, 1087 (Pa. Super. 2023). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Roland Addison, United States of America v. Albert Henry Raymondgreen2 sentences2023In finding that the proffered scientific evidence was inadmissible in Topa, the Court quoted the rationale set forth by the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia in United States v. Addison, 498 F.2d 741 , 744 (D.C.Cir. 1974): ____________________________________________ 10 We recognize the basis of Appellant’s motion in limine, as well as the issue raised on appeal, regards the exclusion of evidence of Appellant’s breath alcohol test result as opposed to a pre-trial motion seeking to allow Ms. Harris to offer an expert opinion at trial regarding the reliability of the test results. 2023In finding that the proffered scientific evidence was inadmissible in Topa, the Court quoted the rationale set forth by the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia in United States v. Addison, 498 F.2d 741, 744 (D.C.Cir. 1974): ____________________________________________ 10 We recognize the basis of Appellant’s motion in limine, as well as the issue raised on appeal, regards the exclusion of evidence of Appellant’s breath alcohol test result as opposed to a pre-trial motion seeking to allow Ms. Harris to offer an expert opinion at trial regarding the reliability of the test results. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2017See Jackson, 698 A.2d at 575 (“police must investigate further by means not constituting a search and seizure”). - 23 - J-S81029-16 concerns than did the bus stop in J.L., that difference appears to be one of degree rather than kind.14 In any event, we decline to create an exception to the well-established reliability requirement on these facts.15 Judgment of sentence reversed. | 1 | 1 |
Juan Trevino v. John J. Dahm, Wardengreen2 sentences2009See 467 U.S. at 489-90 , 104 S.Ct. 2528 (describing challenges to the reliability of the test as "comparable evidence" to be offered in rebuttal, not a justification for suppression); see also Trevino v. Dahm, 2 F.3d 829, 832 (8th Cir.1993) (holding "[a]s long as the defendant has an adequate opportunity to impeach the reliability of a scientific test, and the qualifications of the person administering the test, due process is not implicated by a state's good faith failure to preserve a sample for independent testing"). 2009See 467 U.S. at 489-90 , 104 S.Ct. 2528 (describing challenges to the reliability of the test as “comparable evidence” to be offered in rebuttal, not a justification for suppression); see also Trevino v. Dahm, 2 F.3d 829, 832 (8th Cir.1993) (holding “[a]s long as the defendant has an adequate opportunity to impeach the reliability of a scientific test, and the qualifications of the person administering the test, due process is not implicated by a state’s good faith failure to preserve a sample for independent testing”). | 1 | 1 |
California v. Trombettagreen2 sentences2009See 467 U.S. at 489-90 , 104 S.Ct. 2528 (describing challenges to the reliability of the test as “comparable evidence” to be offered in rebuttal, not a justification for suppression); see also Trevino v. Dahm, 2 F.3d 829, 832 (8th Cir.1993) (holding “[a]s long as the defendant has an adequate opportunity to impeach the reliability of a scientific test, and the qualifications of the person administering the test, due process is not implicated by a state’s good faith failure to preserve a sample for independent testing”). 2009See 467 U.S. at 489-90 , 104 S.Ct. 2528 (describing challenges to the reliability of the test as “comparable evidence” to be offered in rebuttal, not a justification for suppression); see also Trevino v. Dahm, 2 F.3d 829, 832 (8th Cir.1993) (holding “[a]s long as the defendant has an adequate opportunity to impeach the reliability of a scientific test, and the qualifications of the person administering the test, due process is not implicated by a state’s good faith failure to preserve a sample for independent testing”). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Lyonsgreen1 sentence2005See Lyons, supra (holding that child’s statements to psychologist and special agent were reliable because, among other things, questions were open-ended and not prompted by those third parties). ¶ 18 In addition to relying on the tapes themselves, the trial court also made inquiries of Ms. Filiash, the Agency’s investigator. | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Tilliagreen2 sentences1991See Tillia, 359 Pa.Super. at 313 , 518 A.2d at 1252 . 1991See Tillia, 359 Pa.Super. at 313 , 518 A.2d at 1252 . | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Anderlgreen2 sentences1986The accused will accordingly benefit from a pre-test delay due to the “evanescent nature of the alcohol in [the] bloodstream.” Commonwealth v. *265 Anderl, 329 Pa.Super. 69, 85 , 477 A.2d 1356, 1364 (1984); Trefry (citing Schmerber); see, e.g., McCormick on Evidence, supra, at § 205; Moenssens & Inbau, supra; Fitzgerald & Hume, supra. Remoteness in testing for blood alcohol raises the same problems as remoteness in other types of testing, i.e., the reliability of the test result. 1986The accused will accordingly benefit from a pre-test delay due to the “evanescent nature of the alcohol in [the] bloodstream.” Commonwealth v. *265 Anderl, 329 Pa.Super. 69, 85 , 477 A.2d 1356, 1364 (1984); Trefry (citing Schmerber); see, e.g., McCormick on Evidence, supra, at § 205; Moenssens & Inbau, supra; Fitzgerald & Hume, supra. Remoteness in testing for blood alcohol raises the same problems as remoteness in other types of testing, i.e., the reliability of the test result. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Kearney
green
1 sentence2016Regarding this identification, the suppression court reasoned: In reviewing [the reliability factors enumerated in Kearney, supra], the [c]ourt cannot conclude that the identification of [Appellant] at the preliminary hearing was so suggestive as to give rise to an irreparable likelihood of misidentification. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
L.W.B. v. Sosnowski
green
2 sentences1991Although in L.W.B. we did not remand for an express finding that this reliability test was met, we stated that we “will require that finding with respect to expungement hearings conducted more than 30 days after the filing date of the order in this case.” Id., 117 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. at 135, 543 A.2d at 1248 . 1991Although in L.W.B. we did not remand for an express finding that this reliability test was met, we stated that we “will require that finding with respect to expungement hearings conducted more than 30 days after the filing date of the order in this case.” Id., 117 Pa.Commonwealth Ct. at 135, 543 A.2d at 1248 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Commonwealth v. Hess
green
2 sentences1986The court stated: “It cannot be said that the reliability of the test result is vitiated if approval of the device and the procedures comes after the administration of the test.” Id., 349 Pa.Superior Ct. at 442, 503 A.2d at 449 . (emphasis added). 1986The court stated: "It cannot be said that the reliability of the test result is vitiated if approval of the device and the procedures comes after the administration of the test." Id., 349 Pa.Superior Ct. at 442, 503 A.2d at 449 . (emphasis added). | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Aguilar v. Texas
red
2 sentences1984The United States Supreme Court recently enunciated the new standard to be applied in determining whether sufficient probable cause is present for the issuance of a warrant: For all these reasons, we conclude that it is wiser to abandon the “two-pronged test” established by our decisions in Aguilar [v. State of Tex., 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) ] and Spinelli [v. U.S., 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969)]. 1984The United States Supreme Court recently enunciated the new standard to be applied in determining whether sufficient probable cause is present for the issuance of a warrant: For all these reasons, we conclude that it is wiser to abandon the “two-pronged test” established by our decisions in Aguilar [v. State of Tex., 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) ] and Spinelli [v. U.S., 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969)]. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Spinelli v. United States
red
2 sentences1984The United States Supreme Court recently enunciated the new standard to be applied in determining whether sufficient probable cause is present for the issuance of a warrant: For all these reasons, we conclude that it is wiser to abandon the “two-pronged test” established by our decisions in Aguilar [v. State of Tex., 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) ] and Spinelli [v. U.S., 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969)]. 1984The United States Supreme Court recently enunciated the new standard to be applied in determining whether sufficient probable cause is present for the issuance of a warrant: For all these reasons, we conclude that it is wiser to abandon the “two-pronged test” established by our decisions in Aguilar [v. State of Tex., 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964) ] and Spinelli [v. U.S., 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969)]. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Commonwealth v. Williams
green
2 sentences1981Commonwealth v. Williams, 458 Pa. 319 , 326 A.2d 300 (1974). 5 . 1981Commonwealth v. Williams, 458 Pa. 319 , 326 A.2d 300 (1974). 5 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.