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.
7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 3 courts 1998–2016 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Commonwealth v. Verticelligreen2 sentences2016Thus, we see no logical reason why the closely related crime exception would not apply to offenses of different grades.” Commonwealth v. Verticelli, 706 A.2d 820, 825-26 (Pa. 1998), abrogated on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Taylor, 831 A.2d 587, 595-96 (Pa. 2003).5 In so doing, the Court specifically rejected Verticelli’s argument that the exception was inapplicable because leaving the scene of an accident involving damage to an unattended vehicle or property is a summary offense 5 In Verticelli, the Court held that “the exception applies in situations where the crimes charged share a comm 2016Thus, we see no logical reason why the closely related crime exception would not apply to offenses of different grades.” Commonwealth v. Verticelli, 706 A.2d 820, 825-26 (Pa. 1998), abrogated on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Taylor, 831 A.2d 587, 595-96 (Pa. 2003).5 In so doing, the Court specifically rejected Verticelli’s argument that the exception was inapplicable because leaving the scene of an accident involving damage to an unattended vehicle or property is a summary offense 5 In Verticelli, the Court held that “the exception applies in situations where the crimes charged share a comm | 3 | 4 |
Commonwealth v. Taylorgreen1 sentence2016Thus, we see no logical reason why the closely related crime exception would not apply to offenses of different grades.” Commonwealth v. Verticelli, 706 A.2d 820, 825-26 (Pa. 1998), abrogated on other grounds by Commonwealth v. Taylor, 831 A.2d 587, 595-96 (Pa. 2003).5 In so doing, the Court specifically rejected Verticelli’s argument that the exception was inapplicable because leaving the scene of an accident involving damage to an unattended vehicle or property is a summary offense 5 In Verticelli, the Court held that “the exception applies in situations where the crimes charged share a comm | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Reyesgreen1 sentence2010“An exception to the corpus delicti rule known as the closely related crime exception was specifically approved of by this court in McMullen , at 372, 681 A.2d at 723. | 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. Stokes
green
2 sentences1998In Commonwealth v. Stokes, 225 Pa.Super. 411 , 311 A.2d 714 (1973), the crimes charged were pointing a firearm and attempt with intent to kill. 1998In Commonwealth v. Stokes, 225 Pa.Super. 411 , 311 A.2d 714 (1973), the crimes charged were pointing a firearm and attempt with intent to kill. | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Commonwealth v. McMullen
green
1 sentence1998As this court has stated: An exception to the corpus delicti rule known as the closely related crime exception was specifically approved of by this Court in McMullen , at 372, 681 A.2d at 723 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.