Com. v. Ribot, A.
This text of Com. v. Ribot, A. (Com. v. Ribot, A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
J-A31017-16
2017 PA Super 262
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellant : : : v. : : : ANGEL RIBOT : No. 1190 EDA 2015
Appeal from the Order March 27, 2015 In the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County Criminal Division at No(s): CP-51-CR-0009168-2014
BEFORE: BENDER, P.J.E., MOULTON, and FITZGERALD*, JJ.
CONCURRING STATEMENT BY FITZGERALD, J.: FILED AUGUST 15, 2017
I agree with the majority that the best evidence rule does not preclude
the admission of testimony that Appellant was in possession of the buy
money. However, I believe the trial court acted within its discretion when it
credited Appellant’s evidence of a written policy requiring that the buy
money be photocopied over the testimony regarding a change in policy.
Thus, there was an adequate basis for the trial court to find a violation of
departmental policy, which could give rise to a sanction. However, the
preclusion of all testimony regarding the buy money appears to be a drastic
remedy that is not supported by the circumstances of this case. Thus, I
concur in the result.
____________________________________________
* Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Com. v. Ribot, A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/com-v-ribot-a-pasuperct-2017.