holding the defendant’s confession was the product of the intervening circumstances of being confronted with the - 13 - J-S51030-18 suspected murder weapon and his co-conspirator, who accused the defendant of shooting the victim
How later courts described this case
- holding the defendant’s confession was the product of the intervening circumstances of being confronted with the - 13 - J-S51030-18 suspected murder weapon and his co-conspirator, who accused the defendant of shooting the victim
- listing factors to consider in determining whether connection between confession and warrantless arrest was so attenuated as to dissipate taint of illegal arrest
- court declined to apply retroactively new rule invalidating warrant-less searches in home, absent exigent circumstances, even though rule was announced after appellant was arrested and before he went to trial
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
LARSEN, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the result, but write separately because I think it is unnecessary for the majority to even discuss the issues which it considers to be decisive in this case. I would hold that appellant has waived his right to challenge both the legality of his arrest and the effect of any illegality, and would, therefore, not reach either of the issues discussed in the majority opinion. See: Pa.R.A.P. 302(a).