concluding that, in light of what the police observed and learned immediately on entering the apartment, they were justified in entering the bedroom to search for a person for the safety of themselves and the occupants of the apartment
How later courts described this case
- concluding that, in light of what the police observed and learned immediately on entering the apartment, they were justified in entering the bedroom to search for a person for the safety of themselves and the occupants of the apartment
- disapproving the practice of informing the jury of the availability of appellate review
- no error to exclude questions regarding witness's motive to seek government favor where his plea agreement with prosecution was recounted to the jury
- valid consent to search must be “something more than mere ‘acquiescence to a claim of lawful authority’ ”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Liacos, J.
(concurring). I am in general agreement with the majority’s reasoning and agree with their result in this case. I share, however, the Chief Justice’s concern about the proper role of the “presumption of sanity” after credible evidence of insanity has been adduced. I therefore *585 join in that part of his dissenting opinion which suggests that reversal and the granting of a new trial may be appropriate should the Commonwealth fail to produce affirmative evidence of sanity in a case such as this.