Case law

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.

Fiore, A. v. Fiore, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 8, 2019

Husband clearly possessed personal knowledge, which he evidently did not reveal to Wife when they negotiated the MSA, that the truck was in need of significant repair. … Pursell, who was not a qualified expert per Pa.R.E. 702. Although the court referred to Mr.

In the Interest of: M.L.L. Appeal of: T.K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 1, 2015

When Child was later evaluated for early intervention, it was established that she qualified for physical therapy, occupational therapy, special instruction, and speech therapy. … OCY clearly established that M.L.L. suffers from asthma and that the asthma appears to be triggered by exposure to smoke.

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.

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. Russaw, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 17, 2020

Williams testified that she qualified her identification because she was afraid for the safety of her children and herself. Id. at 94. … And the [c]ourt notes that those are the qualifying offenses uncontested, that makes [Section] 9714 applicable.

Com. v. Rodriguez, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · May 15, 2025

In particular, Appellant contends the evidence does not establish his specific intent to kill. Id. Citing Dr. … The appellant in Grubbs argued the detective who testified concerning the appellant’s phone records was not qualified as an expert. Id. at 451.

Com. v. Olivieri, B.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2021

According to Olivieri, “[N.T.] is an interested witness who was given use immunity for his statement, and had equal access to the gun and was just as involved in the dispute between the two groups of teens.” … Given this factual sequence, the subject Instagram post was clearly part of a chain or sequence of events which formed the history of the case and was part of its natural development.

Com. v. Cole, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 2022

How that fits into the intent of the statute which is clearly to relocate a firearm?) … Cole established that his weapon … was being transported to another location for safekeeping.”).

Com. v. Myrick, S.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 2019

Accordingly, Appellant has not properly established an ineffectiveness claim. Appellant asserts that counsel was ineffective for not calling Malik Gleaves and Khareem Little to testify that he acted in self-defense. … Super. 1997) ("The fact that Appellant shot the victim in the back clearly undermines his claim of self-defense.").

Com. v. Swift, D.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 12, 2022

Appellant presented the testimony of several witnesses, including Thomas Guffey (Guffey), who the trial court qualified as an expert in animal fighting.2 Guffey disagreed with Jugan’s testimony. … Guffey’s credibility, and clearly could have changed the jury’s decision in this case. Id. at 8.

Century Indemnity Co. v. OneBeacon Insurance Co.

173 A.3d 784 · Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Oct 17, 2017

Clearly, the “Reinsurance Accepted” amount limits OneBeacon’s liability to pay for losses. … Since the finding remains subject to a motion for reconsideration and has not been appealed, it does not qualify as a final judgment.

In the Interest of: S.N.M., a Minor

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Feb 2, 2016

The record established that Mother tested positive for Marijuana, Benzodiazepine, and PCP on November 19, 2012, and PCP on September 19, 2013. … These statutory mandates clearly place the trial court’s focus on the best interests of the child. In re S.B., 943 A.2d 973, 978 (Pa. Super. 2008) (emphasis in original) (citations and quotations omitted).

Com. v. Smith, C.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 16, 2016

When considering what qualifies as confinement in a place of isolation, this Court has held: the concept is “not geographic isolation, but rather effective isolation from the usual protections of society.” … Such acute distress clearly affected his ability to seek help for his mother and him, - 13 - J-S41011-16 and further confirms the victims were placed in significant fear for a “

Com. v. Benson, R.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 14, 2016

“We will not disturb a trial court’s ruling unless that ruling reflects manifest unreasonableness, or partiality, prejudice, bias, or ill-will, or such lack of support as to be clearly erroneous.” … On this issue, the trial court concluded: The [trial c]ourt [] denied Appellant’s request because the conviction does not qualify as a crimen falsi.

In Re: K.J.K., Appeal of: J.L.C., Mother

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jan 13, 2020

iS delayeduntil they couldhave updated immunizations. (N.T 31 l� l)). Ms. Ganrer indicated that she saw no detriment to theChildren in terminating parental rights, (N.T ... 313). … fulfill or complete the· established goals.

Com. v. Curry, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Sep 13, 2018

Sabine Panzner-Kaelen, a forensic scientist and qualified expert in DNA profiling, testified to recovering DNA from the .40 Glock firearm, magazines and bullets. Ms. … The “Glock” in question was - 11 - J-S54040-18 in the home where he resided, and it clearly met the definition of “firearm.”

Com. v. Hooten, W.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jun 3, 2026

At a pretrial hearing on July 9, 2024, the Commonwealth notified the court Appellant no longer qualified for court-appointed counsel, as he owned a business and his “income [was] too high.” … Clearly, Appellant was notified he must file his post-sentence motions with the Clerk of Courts, yet the record makes clear he only mailed those documents to Judge Ridge.

Com. v. Allen, J.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Jul 2, 2024

, our Supreme Court has also held that a medical expert “who did not perform the autopsy may - 17 - J-S17030-24 testify as to cause of death as long as the testifying expert is qualified … The Medical Examiner clearly demonstrated her independent opinion and did not simply “parrot” the author of the coroner’s report’s conclusions since she disagreed with the

Stecker, M. v. Goosley, M.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania · Apr 15, 2021

-6- J-A01026-21 clearly and palpably committed an error of law that controlled the outcome of the case or constituted an abuse of discretion. … Joseph’s actions for years established a pattern and practice that would be considered reasonable for a third party to rely upon.