Case law

Com. v. Johns, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Aug 6, 2019

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has established that, when a witness is under the age of 14, the trial court must hold a competency hearing. Id. at 650, citing Rosche v. … Likewise, here, the trial court’s instruction clearly, adequately, and accurately presented the law regarding voluntary manslaughter to the jury.

Com. v. Biggs, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 12, 2017

Trial courts possess great discretion in phrasing jury instructions so long as the law is clearly, adequately, and accurately presented to the jury. … as well as any clothing they were wearing; have they made prior identification[s] of the defendant as perpetrator of these crimes or at any other proceedings; was their identification positive or was it qualified

Com. v. Richardson, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 3, 2021

To qualify for an exception to the PCRA’s time limitations under subsection 9545(b)(1)(ii), a petitioner need only establish that the facts upon which the claim is based were unknown to him and could … Similarly, the record clearly establishes that Lucas’s testimony regarding the promise of leniency is a newly-discovered fact for purposes of Section 9545(b)(1)(ii).

Com. v. Fields, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 20, 2019

The Kloiber court held that in cases where the: witness is not in a position to clearly observe the assailant, or he is not positive as to identity, or his positive statements as to identity … When the identification was made, was it positive or was it qualified by any hedging or inconsistencies?

Commonwealth v. O'Neil

2015 Pa. Super. 12 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 20, 2015

Did the lower court err in permitting Commonwealth witnesses Mary Kingcade and Lisa Dungee to testify to the contents of their medical records when they were not qualified as custodians of … In the Commonwealth’s view, the fact that the jury acquitted Appellant of corrupt organizations and several theft charges establishes that she was not prejudiced.

Com. v. Douglas, A.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 1, 2024

In reviewing the facts, as the jury found them, we find no particular facts so clearly of greater weight that in ignoring them we deny justice to [Appellant]; furthermore, we are not shocked by … Appellant emphasizes that she qualified for representation by the Public Defender’s Office, which sheds light on the likelihood of Appellant’s ability to pay the non-mandatory fines.

Lazorka, M. v. UPMC Bedford

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 25, 2024

Accordingly, the evidence of [plaintiff’s] drug abuse tended to establish a material fact and was therefore relevant. … And I think the jury clearly understands, because I clearly understand the differences between their testimonies.

Brown, F. v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.

2016 Pa. Super. 108 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 24, 2016

For a party to invoke the privilege, the following elements must be established: 1) The asserted holder of the privilege is or sought to become a client. … Also documents which are clearly discoverable certain descriptions of injuries of plaintiffs and the procedural litigation status of other cases.

Com. v. Akes, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 26, 2016

A defendant must separately establish a legitimate expectation of privacy in the area searched or thing seized. … Sadler qualified under the definition of an unavailable witness, her statement that she left an ID card and insurance card in the vehicle with Mr.

Ciampa, P. v. Conversion Sciences, Inc.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Dec 8, 2015

Clearly, these principles animated the trial court’s calculation of damages. … In this regard, it has been held that an account is sufficiently complicated to enable equity to take hold when a jury would not be qualified to state such an account.

Com. v. Snyder, G.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 11, 2015

1, 14 (Pa. 2014) (addressing a challenge to the constitutionality of the retroactive application of SORNA and observing that “a party challenging a statute must meet the high burden of demonstrating that the statute clearly … On appeal, this Court observed that the defendant’s challenge to the constitutionality of the retroactive application of SORNA must be evaluated under a two-step test, established by the United States Supreme Court in

Commonwealth v. Reeves

255 Pa. Super. 409 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 28, 1978

"Although the evidence must show more than a mere association to establish the conspiracy, `[a] conspiracy may be inferentially established by showing the relation, conduct, or circumstances of the parties, and the overt … I believe that the photographs of the appellants and the testimony explaining the scenes depicted in those photographs clearly combine to establish that the appellants participated in the destruction of the east fence.

Com. v. Wood, T.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 12, 2018

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 … First, it is worth noting that a sentencing court's after-the-fact 1925(a) opinion offered in justification of the sentence imposed does not qualify as a Section 9721(b) contemporaneous written statement of

Com. v. Gonzales, H.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2017

A blanket claim of excessiveness, with no further allegations, does not create a qualifying substantial question for appellate review. Id. … This pattern of behavior was firmly established Dr. Ziv had reviewed.

Kozak, P. v. West Vincent Township

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 15, 2020

Appellant’s Brief at 14. 10 The trial court made no ruling upon a claim that Appellant should be qualified to testify as an expert medical witness. … Plaintiff produced direct and competent evidence which, if believed, clearly established the casual relationship between the accident and the injuries.

Com. v. Deloatch, V.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 25, 2022

In Bennett, supra, our Supreme Court qualified its holding in Gamboa-Taylor by stating that an allegation of ineffective assistance of previous PCRA counsel may constitute a “fact” for purposes of the newly-discovered … The first document is the clerk's notes from January 30, 2019, which clearly [indicates Appellant’s] first PCRA was denied that [same] day.

Com. v. Reese, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 23, 2018

A careful review of the facts as fully set forth by the appellant clearly indicate insufficiency as a matter of law. … The two oral sex incidents alone clearly qualify as crimes under indecent assault, as those acts constitute indecent contact as defined in the statute.

Com. v. Hofmann, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 21, 2023

Hofmann maintains that the photograph was highly inflammatory, and any probative value was clearly outweighed by the prejudice. … Thus, the trial court clearly considered Hofmann’s mitigating factors and his rehabilitative needs.

Com. v. Hill, F.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 22, 2020

Victim was distressed and upset when they arrived on scene and spoke to her; evidence showed Victim was still overwhelmed by what had occurred at time she related that Appellant had assaulted her; thus, Victim’s statement qualified … In this case, the evidence clearly showed that the complainant was distraught at the time she told the police that Appellant was the person who caused her injuries.

Com. v. Ivey, S

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Mar 30, 2020

Clearly, this did not occur in the present action. As such, Appellant’s claim that ADA Michelson’s criminal activity gave rise to the type of due process violation that occurred in Williams is meritless. … Indeed, Appellant failed to establish that Williams announced a new constitutional right held to apply retroactively.