Marks rule in Pennsylvania

2025In turn, Section 3755 cannot be upheld by reference to the declaration in 125 Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 , 193 (1977) (quoting Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 , 169 n.15 (1976) (plurality)); see also Commonwealth v. Alexander, 243 A.3d 177 , 197 (Pa. 2020) (citing Commonwealth v. McClelland, 233 A.3d 717 , 731 (Pa. 2020)) (“We apply the Marks rule.”). 126 Mitchell, 588 U.S. at 843, 857 (plurality). 127 Id. at 844. [J-43-2024] - 36 Section 1547(a) that people who drive a vehicle in Pennsylvania “shall be deemed to have given consent” to a warrantless blood draw. 128 Section 3755 concer

2025In turn, Section 3755 cannot be upheld by reference to the declaration in 125 Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 , 193 (1977) (quoting Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 , 169 n.15 (1976) (plurality)); see also Commonwealth v. Alexander, 243 A.3d 177 , 197 (Pa. 2020) (citing Commonwealth v. McClelland, 233 A.3d 717 , 731 (Pa. 2020)) (“We apply the Marks rule.”). 126 Mitchell, 588 U.S. at 843, 857 (plurality). 127 Id. at 844. [J-43-2024] - 36 Section 1547(a) that people who drive a vehicle in Pennsylvania “shall be deemed to have given consent” to a warrantless blood draw. 128 Section 3755 concer

2025In turn, Section 3755 cannot be upheld by reference to the declaration in 125 Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 , 193 (1977) (quoting Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 , 169 n.15 (1976) (plurality)); see also Commonwealth v. Alexander, 243 A.3d 177 , 197 (Pa. 2020) (citing Commonwealth v. McClelland, 233 A.3d 717 , 731 (Pa. 2020)) (“We apply the Marks rule.”). 126 Mitchell, 588 U.S. at 843, 857 (plurality). 127 Id. at 844. [J-43-2024] - 36 Section 1547(a) that people who drive a vehicle in Pennsylvania “shall be deemed to have given consent” to a warrantless blood draw. 128 Section 3755 concer

2025In turn, Section 3755 cannot be upheld by reference to the declaration in 125 Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 , 193 (1977) (quoting Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 , 169 n.15 (1976) (plurality)); see also Commonwealth v. Alexander, 243 A.3d 177 , 197 (Pa. 2020) (citing Commonwealth v. McClelland, 233 A.3d 717 , 731 (Pa. 2020)) (“We apply the Marks rule.”). 126 Mitchell, 588 U.S. at 843, 857 (plurality). 127 Id. at 844. [J-43-2024] - 36 Section 1547(a) that people who drive a vehicle in Pennsylvania “shall be deemed to have given consent” to a warrantless blood draw. 128 Section 3755 concer

2024See Commonwealth v. Brown, 23 A.3d 544, 557 (Pa. Super. 2011) (en banc) (“[W]e must conclude that Justice Castille’s concurrence in McCree narrowly inures the plurality’s [opinion announcing judgment of court] with precedential value regarding automobile searches and seizures in the following limited respect: where police officers observe incriminating-looking contraband in plain view in a vehicle from a lawful vantage-point, the lack of advance notice and opportunity to obtain a warrant provides the officers with a lawful right of access to seize the object in question.”); see generally Linda

2024See Commonwealth v. Brown, 23 A.3d 544, 557 (Pa. Super. 2011) (en banc) (“[W]e must conclude that Justice Castille’s concurrence in McCree narrowly inures the plurality’s [opinion announcing judgment of court] with precedential value regarding automobile searches and seizures in the following limited respect: where police officers observe incriminating-looking contraband in plain view in a vehicle from a lawful vantage-point, the lack of advance notice and opportunity to obtain a warrant provides the officers with a lawful right of access to seize the object in question.”); see generally Linda

2011As several circuits have convincingly explained, “the Marks rule is applicable only where ‘one opinion can be meaningfully regarded as “narrower” than another’ ” and “can ‘represent a common denominator of the Court’s reasoning.’ ” Anker Energy Corp. v. Consolidation Coal Co., 177 F.3d 161, 170 (3rd Cir.1999) (quoting King v. Palmer, 950 F.2d 771, 781 (D.C.Cir.1991) (en banc)).

2011As several circuits have convincingly explained, “the Marks rule is applicable only where ‘one opinion can be meaningfully regarded as “narrower” than another’ ” and “can ‘represent a common denominator of the Court’s reasoning.’ ” Anker Energy Corp. v. Consolidation Coal Co., 177 F.3d 161, 170 (3rd Cir.1999) (quoting King v. Palmer, 950 F.2d 771, 781 (D.C.Cir.1991) (en banc)).

2011As several circuits have convincingly explained, “the Marks rule is applicable only where ‘one opinion can be meaningfully regarded as “narrower” than another’ ” and “can ‘represent a common denominator of the Court’s reasoning.’ ” Anker Energy Corp. v. Consolidation Coal Co., 177 F.3d 161, 170 (3rd Cir.1999) (quoting King v. Palmer, 950 F.2d 771, 781 (D.C.Cir.1991) (en banc)).

2011As several circuits have convincingly explained, “the Marks rule is applicable only where ‘one opinion can be meaningfully regarded as “narrower” than another’ ” and “can ‘represent a common denominator of the Court’s reasoning.’ ” Anker Energy Corp. v. Consolidation Coal Co., 177 F.3d 161, 170 (3rd Cir.1999) (quoting King v. Palmer, 950 F.2d 771, 781 (D.C.Cir.1991) (en banc)).

1998Applying the Marks rule, Justice Souter’s opinion articulates the holding of the Court since it shares with the majority of the Justices a common underlying approach and, since Justice Souter ruled on the narrowest ground, his concurrence therefore is the law.” Pap's A.M. v. City of Erie, 674 A.2d 338, 343 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996). 9 .

1998Applying the Marks rule, Justice Souter’s opinion articulates the holding of the Court since it shares with the majority of the Justices a common underlying approach and, since Justice Souter ruled on the narrowest ground, his concurrence therefore is the law.” Pap's A.M. v. City of Erie, 674 A.2d 338, 343 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996). 9 .