Case law

Com. v. Robinson, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 7, 2025

Appellant argues that it was improper for the trial court to allow Detective Paul to testify as an expert, when he had not been qualified as such. … The Commonwealth also introduced the content of text messages and phone calls which established [Appellant’s] involvement in the drug transactions at issue.

Com. v. McCoy, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2019

In her second issue, Appellant argues Officer Walker was not qualified -8- J-A05013-19 to testify about the 911 report. … However, her operation of the vehicle was clearly established by circumstantial evidence.

In Re: B.L.F., a minor, Appeal of: B.M.F.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 2017

Father argues that testimony from other proceedings is hearsay pursuant to Pa.R.E. 801(c) and does not qualify for the Pa.R.E. 804(b)(1) former testimony exception to the hearsay rule. Id. … Because the trial court did not determine whether alternative services enabling the child to remain with Father were feasible, the court did not establish that separation from Father was clearly necessary to ensure the

Com. v. Gladfelter, A

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 26, 2018

This Court has previously interpreted a trial court’s responsibilities pursuant to Pa.R.Crim.P. 587(B) as follows: To establish whether a motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds qualifies as a collateral … Gains, 556 A.2d 870, 874 (Pa.Super. 1989) (“A frivolous claim is a claim clearly and palpably without merit; it is a claim which presents no debatable question”).

Hannibal, A. v. Solid Waste Services

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 19, 2023

Unlike in Bogdan or Roosevelt Inn, Admiral clearly concedes in its pleadings that [its] liability in this case is uncertain. … Super. 2002) (providing that the insurer has the burden to show that an asserted exclusion clearly and unambiguously prevents the coverage of a claim).

Fandray, N. v. Baum, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2016

Summary judgment is appropriate only when the record clearly shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. … In order to establish legal malpractice, a plaintiff must establish: 1) employment of the attorney or other basis for a duty; 2) the failure of the attorney to exercise ordinary skill and knowledge; and 3) that such negligence

Munoz, F. v. The Children's Hospital of Phila.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 27, 2025

Parrillo for not recognizing Decedent was experiencing sepsis or systemic immune response syndrome (SIRS).7 Id. at 213, 217-18, 228-230, 234-36. Dr. … Paynter and Nurse Jolin, were not qualified to evaluate Dr.

Com. v. Rivera, N., Jr.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 13, 2020

Our Supreme Court’s decisions in Smith and Johnson establish that Pennsylvania’s double jeopardy clause bars a retrial when the Commonwealth engages either in intentional misconduct designed to deny the defendant a fair … The trial court denied the Commonwealth’s motion because it failed to disclose before trial its intent to qualify Agent Sproat as an expert witness. Id. at 77-78.

Com. v. Bush, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 30, 2014

Given the circumstances, Vineere's statements clearly fell with the purview of the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. … Middleman qualified her statement by saying "we don'! know whose.

Com. v. Peterson, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 4, 2016

Appellant claims the statement did not qualify under the excited utterance or the present sense impression exceptions to the hearsay rule. Id. at 14-17. … Thus, the evidence is more than sufficient to establish that the defendant carried a firearm in public without a license.

Com. v. Duncan, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 7, 2016

Although there is no document concerning an offer of immunity in the reproduced record, the Commonwealth's immunity agreement to Mr. Bowman is memorialized in the transcript of the Grand Jury proceeding. … The jury clearly found that Duncan acted with the specific intent to willfully and deliberately kill Newman.

Holland, J. &. S. v. Hartsocks Custom Cabinets

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 17, 2023

The complaint clearly captioned both Appellants as defendants in the action. … The law does not establish a specific time within which a petition to open a judgment must be filed to qualify as timely.

Coleman v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

2010 Pa. Super. 158 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 30, 2010

The study was halted three years early because results indicated that the risks of taking HRT medications clearly outweighed the benefits. … Sun Co., 831 A.2d 696, 712 (Pa.Super.2003), For an averment to qualify as a judicial admission, however, it must be a clear and unequivocal admission of fact.

Com. v. Davis, E.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 14, 2022

Meanwhile, Officer Norman Locke, a member of the North Versailles Township Police Department involved in the undercover investigation, was parked in a marked cruiser in a location where he could clearly observe the parking … While “marijuana no longer is per se illegal in this Commonwealth” following passage of the MMA, “possession of marijuana [is] illegal for those not qualified under the MMA.” Barr, 266 A.3d at 41.

Com. v. Daye, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 21, 2024

points to Cole’s history as a drug dealer, his failure to tell the police who shot him until after Dent was shot the next day, and the fact that Cole received favorable treatment on federal charges pending against him and immunity … Rather, the role of the trial judge is to determine that notwithstanding all the facts, certain facts are so clearly of greater weight that to ignore them or to give them equal weight with all the facts

Com. v. Armstrong, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 23, 2019

Since the parties stipulated that the substances reported were qualifying controlled substances, the evidence was sufficient to establish the presence of a Schedule I controlled substance in Armstrong's blood. … Those facts circumstantially established actual physical control.

Com. v. Daniels, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 2017

Thomas Netzel, by convincingly relating the manner in which the crimes occurred, provided the qualifying offense elements for Robbery. Mr. … The evidence clearly establishes the recovered weapon was used during the commission of robbery which is a criminal purpose. This type of weapon or handgun is also commonly used for criminal purposes.

Elliott, Greenleaf & Siedzikowski v. Cichocki, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 2017

After careful review, we conclude that the Dalgewicz Family has failed to establish that the production of this information concerns a matter deeply rooted in public policy. … Clearly, the Law Firm is already aware of the complaint. Thus, there is no issue of maintaining secrecy of the process – that horse has already left the barn.

Com. v. Bates, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 24, 2018

Bing, 713 A.2d 56 (Pa. 1998).3 The Commonwealth retains a qualified privilege to withhold the identity of a confidential source. Commonwealth v. Watson, 69 A.3d 605, 607 (Pa. Super. 2013). … Based on this evidence, the trial court found: by evidence clearly that the disclosure of the identification of the [CI] in this case could and would present danger to that [CI] if it was disclosed and

In the Interest of: A.Z., a minor, Appeal of: Y.Z.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2016

. … If the court finds that the child is not a dependent child or that the allegations of delinquency have not been established it shall dismiss the petition and order the child discharged … Commonwealth, including any relative, who, after study by the probation officer or other person or agency designated by the court, is found by the court to be qualified