Com. v. Carontenuto, K.

Superior Court of Pennsylvania·Decided August 31, 2016·No. 1693 EDA 2015·Published

Opinion

J-A08021-16 2016 PA Super 197

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA

Appellant :

:

v. :

:

KEVIN MICHAEL CARONTENUTO, :

:

Appellee : No. 1693 EDA 2015

Appeal from the Order Entered May 7, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-09-CR-0001117-2015

BEFORE: BOWES, OLSON and STRASSBURGER,* JJ. CONCURRING STATEMENT BY STRASSBURGER, J.:FILED AUGUST 31, 2016 I join the erudite Majority Opinion. I write separately to note how divorced from reality the Commonwealth’s position is. In its reply brief, the Commonwealth states: “If a caller has not engaged in one of the enumerated offenses set forth in the Immunity Statute, then such a caller faces no potential prosecution and need have no fear of calling for aid for the person overdosing.” Commonwealth’s Reply Brief at 3. The suggestion that a person present at a crime scene could have no fear of prosecution does not comport with the real world.

*Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Com. v. Carontenuto, K., (Pa. Ct. App. 2016).

Com. v. Carontenuto, K. (Com. v. Carontenuto, K.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Carontenuto
148 A.3d 448 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2016)