Commonwealth v. Adams

48 A.3d 1230, 616 Pa. 437, 2012 WL 2899076, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1570
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided July 17, 2012·No. No. 135 MAL 2012·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 17th day of July 2012, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as stated by petitioner, are:

(1) Is the Fifth Amendment right against self[-]incrimination, and Article [I,] Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, implicated by testimony presented by the Commonwealth that the [sergeant] investigating a homicide stated that [petitioner] did not want to speak with the officer, followed by the [sergeant]’s testimony that he introduced himself as a police investigator, that he was investigating a homicide and [petitioner]^ name had come up?

(2) Is the Superior Court permitted, under prevailing law regarding the “harmless error” doctrine, to consider evidence that was contradict[1231]*1231ed by other evidence introduced by [petitioner]?

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

Commonwealth v. Adams, 48 A.3d 1230, 616 Pa. 437, 2012 WL 2899076, 2012 Pa. LEXIS 1570 (Pa. 2012).

48 A.3d 1230 (Commonwealth v. Adams) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Commonwealth v. Adams, S., Aplt.
104 A.3d 511 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2014)
Commonwealth v. Fischere
70 A.3d 1270 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 2013)