Case law

Commonwealth v. Santiago

405 Pa. Super. 56 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 30, 1991

Cronic, 466 U.S. 648, 655 , 104 S.Ct. 2039, 2044-2045 , 80 L.Ed.2d 657, 665 (1984) (quoting Lord Eldon from Kaufman, Does the Judge Have a Right to Qualified Counsel?, 61 A.B.A.J. 569, 569 (1975). … It sits neither to prove guilt nor establish innocence; but merely to maintain a fair trial.

Com. v. Porterfield, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 2018

Porterfield admitted to Trooper Hogue that he had consumed a six-pack of beer, but alleged that he was not drunk because he was “immune” to alcohol. … because an appellate court might have reached a different conclusion, but requires a result of manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support so as to be clearly

Toppy, E. v. Passage Bio

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 25, 2025

That sentence clearly states that a party shall be responsible for the mediators’ time and expenses incurred in “responding” to a subpoena. … Super. 1990) (trial court erred by sustaining preliminary objections and dismissing complaint by sua sponte raising immunity issue that defendant did not raise).

Com. v. Williams, E.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 20, 2019

However, its operation does not qualify a defendant automatically to relief. … To· establish ·tha.t' counsel was ineffective for failing to call a.

Com. v. Zeigafuse, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 5, 2016

And clearly the County of Northampton is not suitable to give you that treatment. … The board shall establish standards for evaluations and for evaluators conducting the assessments.

Com. v. Desouza, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 7, 2023

Nevertheless, the Commonwealth need not establish guilt to a mathematical certainty. … Appellant’s argument qualifies as a challenge to the discretionary aspects of his sentence. See Commonwealth v. Gonzalez–Dejusus, 994 A.2d 595 (Pa.

Com. v. Kittrell, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 16, 2019

In addition, the District Attorney’s Office was clearly aware of the fact that Sergeant Watson had been the subject of disciplinary proceedings in relation to the December 31, 2009 incident. … Our Supreme Court did not elaborate upon the rule it announced in Smith or offer a test to assist future courts in determining, precisely, what type of prosecutorial nondisclosures qualified as intentionally prejudicial

In the Interest of: R.M.R., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 2016

The court may not separate the child from her parent unless it finds that the separation is clearly necessary. In re G.T., 845 A.2d 870 (Pa.Super. 2004). … be made or continue to be made, determine whether the county agency has filed or sought to join a petition to terminate parental rights and to identify, recruit, process and approve a qualified

Kersey, P. v. Pisano, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 7, 2023

In August 2018, the trial court entered a case management order which established, inter alia, a deadline for expert reports on December 2, 2019. … Wu’s reports and testimony, established a cause of action - 22 - J-A24032-22 regarding Dr.

Com. v. White-Ashe, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 2, 2021

“[T]he 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 is to deny justice. … Trial at 166-67 (court-qualified expert Detective Taylor testifying, “Well, [the lack of cash is] easily explainable because the amount of controlled substances that were found . . .

Com. v. Amos, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 22, 2017

We therefore cannot assess whether the prosecutor had race -5- J-A21040-17 neutral reasons for deeming them to be qualified, despite their lack of a college education. … 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

In Re: C.P.D., Appeal of: T.P.D.

324 A.3d 11 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 6, 2024

Williams was qualified as an expert in psychology, forensic psychology, and bonding and attachment assessments and capacity evaluations. Dr. … Although his ability to clearly testify to the - 11 - J-S23016-24 dates was limited, he acknowledged being released from jail to a program called “Minsec” in 2005

Com. v. Lont, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 6, 2015

Appellant clearly was informed multiple times that the trial court was not bound by the initially negotiated cap regarding his minimum sentence; indeed, Appellant so acknowledged on the record. N.T. … Thus, “although we employ an abuse of discretion standard, we do so recognizing that the judge himself is best qualified to gauge his ability to preside impartially.”

Com. v. Gray, E.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 18, 2017

In its opinion, the PCRA court held that Appellant’s assertions “that trial counsel could not effectively represent him because he is from Warren County and had lost confidence in him does not qualify as a substantial … Clearly the Appellant has failed to meet his burden of proof. PCRA Court Opinion, 2/14/2017, at 9. We agree with the court’s assessment.

Com. v. Waters, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 2026

The Commonwealth bears the burden of establishing the harmlessness of the error. … He argues that D.B.’s statements to her mother, two days after the sexual assault incident, and to the police officer thereafter, lacked “the necessary level of spontaneity” to qualify as excited utterances because D.B

Com. v. Luperi, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2025

Upon review, we discern no abuse of discretion in determining that Juror No. 35 qualified as a juror and, therefore, it was proper to deny Appellant’s motion to strike for cause. … Super. 1980) (stating that because the indecent assault statute is silent as to the culpability sufficient to establish the crime, 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 302(c) requires that the Commonwealth establish that the defendant acted

Com. v. Waring, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 18, 2016

Burton stated that although he took immunity, he was going to tell the truth regardless of having received it. … Similarly, the jury was also aware that James Burton testified under a grant of immunity.

Com. v. Rogers, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 2019

Appellant raises the following issue for our review: Whether the [PCRA] court erred in denying PCRA relief when the record clearly showed trial counsel had no reasonable basis for … So that would not make out self-defense nor would it qualify under voluntary manslaughter or a mistaken belief in self-defense.

Com. v. Cragle, L.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 6, 2018

A reading of appellant’s brief on this issue reveals that he does nothing more than set forth certain portions of the victim’s trial testimony which he contends if “taken as true, [] clearly shows that sexual intercourse … Therefore, even if appellant had not 3 Although a qualified expert in sexual assault cases may testify to facts and opinions regarding specific types of victim responses and victim behaviors, an expert’s opinion testimony

Com. v. Morgan, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2022

thus, where the trial court at resentencing merely adjusts the sentences on various counts in order to preserve the aggregate term of imprisonment imposed in the original sentencing scheme, the new sentence does not qualify … Rather, the appellant must establish, by reference to the record, that the sentencing court ignored or misapplied the law, exercised its judgment for reasons of partiality, prejudice, bias or ill will, or