Opinion

Commonwealth v. Lynch

  • 270 Pa. Super. 554
  • 411 A.2d 1224
Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
May 5, 1980
Status
Published
Author
Montgomery
On the bench
Van Voort, Hester, Montgomery
Cited by
21 cases

Modified by Commonwealth v. Wojdak, 502 Pa. 359 (1983)

The opinion

MONTGOMERY,

Judge, concurring and dissenting:

I agree with the conclusion reached by the Majority with respect to the affirmance of the lower court’s discharge of the Appellees on the charges of attempted theft by extortion and conspiracy to commit theft by extortion. However, I must respectfully dissent as to the affirmance of the action of the habeas corpus court on the remaining charges outstanding against the Appellees. In my view, the record sets forth facts which are clearly sufficient to establish a prima facie case, sufficient for trial, on each remaining charge against the Appellees. Thus, I would reverse the habeas corpus court and reinstate all charges against each Appellee except those involving attempted theft by extortion and conspiracy to commit theft by extortion.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.