# In Re Martorano

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · October 3, 1975 · 464 Pa. 66

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9751375

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re Raymond MARTORANO. Appeal of the COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 3, 1975
- **Citations:** 464 Pa. 66; 346 A.2d 22; 1975 Pa. LEXIS 1034
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Nix
- **Judges:** Jones, Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino
- **Cited by:** 107 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9751375

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that even if double jeopardy applied to civil contempt, no double jeopardy issue would arise from separate adjudications of civil contempt when a witness before a grand jury refused to answer a similar question on two separate days
- finding a plaintiff's due process claim waived because it was raised for the first time on appeal

## Opinion text

NIX, Justice
(dissenting).
In the instant case upon a filing of its petition the Deputy Attorney General, appellee’s counsel and the supervising judge went into an anteroom at which time the stenographer read questions asked of appellee that day during the grand jury. Appellee’s counsel was then asked to leave, but the Deputy Attorney General remained with the supervising judge for a short in camera hearing. These facts are similar to those in In re Falone, 464 Pa. 42 , 346 A.2d 9 (1975), and I dissent here for the reasons expressed in my dissenting opinion in In re Falone, supra.
EAGEN, J, joins in this dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9751375. Public record. Not legal advice.