tip meeting the first standard (Pennsylvania) · Go Syfert
← Pennsylvania issues

tip meeting the first standard in Pennsylvania

10 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1973–1982 0 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Betrand Appealgreen
pa · 1973 · cited in 6 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1974–1982
2 sentences

1982Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable. [Footnotes and citations omitted.] Id., 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 ; quoted in Commonwealth v. Hughes, 268 Pa.Super.Ct. 536, 542 , 408 A.2d 1132, 1135 (1980).

1982Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable. [Footnotes and citations omitted.] Id., 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 ; quoted in Commonwealth v. Hughes, 268 Pa.Super.Ct. 536, 542 , 408 A.2d 1132, 1135 (1980).

36
Commonwealth v. Hughesgreen
pasuperct · 1979 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982
2 sentences

1982Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable. [Footnotes and citations omitted.] Id., 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 ; quoted in Commonwealth v. Hughes, 268 Pa.Super.Ct. 536, 542 , 408 A.2d 1132, 1135 (1980).

1982Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable. [Footnotes and citations omitted.] Id., 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 ; quoted in Commonwealth v. Hughes, 268 Pa.Super.Ct. 536, 542 , 408 A.2d 1132, 1135 (1980).

11
Commonwealth v. Emerichgreen
pasuperct · 1973 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
2 sentences

1980See Commonwealth v. Emerich, 225 Pa.Super. 163 , 310 A.2d 390 (1973); Commonwealth v. Ambers, 225 Pa.Super. 381 , 310 A.2d 347 (1973).

1980See Commonwealth v. Emerich, 225 Pa.Super. 163 , 310 A.2d 390 (1973); Commonwealth v. Ambers, 225 Pa.Super. 381 , 310 A.2d 347 (1973).

11
Commonwealth v. Hawkinsgreen
pasuperct · 1976 · cited in 1 Pennsylvania opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979
2 sentences

1979Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Betrand Appeal, 451 Pa. 381, 386 , 303 A.2d 486, 488 (1973); see, e. g., Commonwealth v. Hawkins, 240 Pa.Super. 56 , 362 A.2d 374, 376 (1976).

1979Second, in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Betrand Appeal, 451 Pa. 381, 386 , 303 A.2d 486, 488 (1973); see, e. g., Commonwealth v. Hawkins, 240 Pa.Super. 56 , 362 A.2d 374, 376 (1976).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Aguilar v. Texas red
scotus · 1964
2 sentences

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

61973–1980
Spinelli v. United States red
scotus · 1969
2 sentences

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

61973–1980
Commonwealth v. Garvin green
pa · 1972
2 sentences

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

51973–1980
Commonwealth v. Mamon green
pa · 1972
2 sentences

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

1976As we stated in Betrand , su pra, 451 Pa. at 386 , 303 A.2d at 488 , when the hearsay-information is supplied by an anonymous informer, “ . . .in order to assure that the tip is not merely an unsupported rumor, the officer must know the underlying circumstances from which the informer concluded that the suspect participated in the [crime] . [and] in order to reduce the possibility that a tip meeting the first standard is merely a well constructed fabrication, the officer must have some reasonable basis for concluding that the source of the tip was reliable.” Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S.

41973–1976
Commonwealth v. Ambers green
pasuperct · 1973
2 sentences

1980See Commonwealth v. Emerich, 225 Pa.Super. 163 , 310 A.2d 390 (1973); Commonwealth v. Ambers, 225 Pa.Super. 381 , 310 A.2d 347 (1973).

1980See Commonwealth v. Emerich, 225 Pa.Super. 163 , 310 A.2d 390 (1973); Commonwealth v. Ambers, 225 Pa.Super. 381 , 310 A.2d 347 (1973).

11980–1980
Commonwealth v. Swierczewski green
pasuperct · 1969
2 sentences

1978Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); Betrand Appeal, 451 Pa. 381 , 303 A.2d 486 (1973); Commonwealth v. Simmons, supra. Thus, “a search warrant may not constitutionally issue upon an affidavit which fails to set forth substantiating facts and circumstances from which the magistrate might make an independent and detached appraisal of the probability that a crime had been or was being committed.” Commonwealth v. Swierczewski, 215 Pa.Super. 130 , 257 A.2d 336 (1969).

1978Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S.Ct. 584 , 21 L.Ed.2d 637 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964); Betrand Appeal, 451 Pa. 381 , 303 A.2d 486 (1973); Commonwealth v. Simmons, supra. Thus, “a search warrant may not constitutionally issue upon an affidavit which fails to set forth substantiating facts and circumstances from which the magistrate might make an independent and detached appraisal of the probability that a crime had been or was being committed.” Commonwealth v. Swierczewski, 215 Pa.Super. 130 , 257 A.2d 336 (1969).

11978–1978
Commonwealth v. Brown green
pasuperct · 1974
2 sentences

1975Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S. Ct. 584 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 (1964); Commonwealth *89 v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 293 A.2d 33 (1972); cf. Commonwealth v. Mamon, 449 Pa. 249 , 297 A.2d 471 (1972)." See also Commonwealth v. Lassiter, 457 Pa. 582 (1974); Commonwealth v. Brown, 228 Pa. Superior Ct. 158 (1974).

1975Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S. Ct. 584 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 (1964); Common wealth v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 298 A.2d 33 (1972); cf. Commonwealth v. Mamon, 449 Pa. 249 , 297 A.2d 471 (1972).” See also Commonwealth v. Lassiter, 457 Pa. 582 (1974); Commonwealth v. Brown, 228 Pa. Superior Ct. 158 (1974).

11975–1975
Commonwealth v. Lassiter green
pa · 1974
2 sentences

1975Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S. Ct. 584 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 (1964); Commonwealth *89 v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 293 A.2d 33 (1972); cf. Commonwealth v. Mamon, 449 Pa. 249 , 297 A.2d 471 (1972)." See also Commonwealth v. Lassiter, 457 Pa. 582 (1974); Commonwealth v. Brown, 228 Pa. Superior Ct. 158 (1974).

1975Spinelli v. United States, 393 U.S. 410 , 89 S. Ct. 584 (1969); Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S. Ct. 1509 (1964); Common wealth v. Garvin, 448 Pa. 258 , 298 A.2d 33 (1972); cf. Commonwealth v. Mamon, 449 Pa. 249 , 297 A.2d 471 (1972).” See also Commonwealth v. Lassiter, 457 Pa. 582 (1974); Commonwealth v. Brown, 228 Pa. Superior Ct. 158 (1974).

11975–1975

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check