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.
13 Pennsylvania opinions name it 1 courts 2002–2025 5 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. Brewingtongreen2 sentences2021Commonwealth v. Brewington, 740 A.2d 247, 254 (Pa. Super. 1999)[.] With respect to the first prong, that the statement is given under reliable circumstances, our Supreme Court has deemed reliable only certain statements; among them is a statement that is “reduced to a writing and signed and adopted by the witness.” Lively, 610 A.2d at 10 . 2019Commonwealth v. Brewington, 740 A.2d 247, 254 (Pa. Super. 1999), appeal denied, … 758 A.2d 660 ([Pa.] 2000). | 3 | 3 |
Commonwealth v. Livelygreen2 sentences2025With respect to the first prong, that the statement is given under reliable circumstances, our Supreme Court has deemed reliable only certain statements; among them is a statement that is reduced to a writing and signed and adopted by the witness. [See Commonwealth v. Lively, 610 A.2d 7, 9-10 (Pa. 1992); see also Pa.R.E. 803.1(1).] With respect to the second prong, cross-examination, the inconsistent statement itself must be the subject of the cross-examination in order to satisfy the test. 2025With respect to the first prong, that the statement is given under reliable circumstances, our Supreme Court has deemed reliable only certain statements; among them is a statement that is reduced to a writing and signed and adopted by the witness. [See Commonwealth v. Lively, 610 A.2d 7, 9-10 (Pa. 1992); see also Pa.R.E. 803.1(1).] With respect to the second prong, cross-examination, the inconsistent statement itself must be the subject of the cross-examination in order to satisfy the test. | 2 | 8 |
Commonwealth v. Carmodygreen2 sentences2016“The test is a two-part inquiry: 1) whether the statement is given *1041 under reliable circumstances; and 2) whether the declarant is available for cross-examination.” Id. ‘With respect to the second prong, cross-examination, the inconsistent statement itself must be the subject of the cross-examination in order to satisfy the test.” Id. at 148 . 2016“The test is a two-part inquiry: 1) whether the statement is given *1041 under reliable circumstances; and 2) whether the declarant is available for cross-examination.” Id. ‘With respect to the second prong, cross-examination, the inconsistent statement itself must be the subject of the cross-examination in order to satisfy the test.” Id. at 148 . | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.