# Commonwealth v. Caufman

> Superior Court of Pennsylvania · July 14, 1992 · 417 Pa. Super. 131

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9756904

## Case

- **Full name:** COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Mary M. CAUFMAN, Appellant
- **Court:** Superior Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 14, 1992
- **Citations:** 417 Pa. Super. 131; 611 A.2d 1300; 1992 Pa. Super. LEXIS 2148
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Rowley
- **Judges:** Rowley, President Judge, and Montemuro and Hester
- **Cited by:** 3 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/9756904

## Opinion text

ROWLEY, President Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent.
I am not convinced that the record before us discloses a failure on the part of the Commonwealth to act with due diligence. According to the Commonwealth, the “main investigator” was on vacation until the second week of November. Following his return to work he “investigated the accident” and then the charge at issue here was filed. I agree with the trial court that, on the basis of this record, “the Commonwealth acted diligently and in a manner which did not offend the rationale of the double jeopardy prohibition.”
For this reason I would affirm the order of the trial court and remand the case for trial.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9756904. Public record. Not legal advice.